From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: hanjun.guo@linaro.org (Hanjun Guo)
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 16:56:00 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Convert smsc911x to use ACPI as well as DT
In-Reply-To: <1443042212.74600.30.camel@infradead.org>
References: <1439417187-21411-1-git-send-email-jeremy.linton@arm.com>
 <1439417187-21411-3-git-send-email-jeremy.linton@arm.com>
 <1443033714.74600.18.camel@infradead.org> <560310EA.2070805@intel.com>
 <1443042212.74600.30.camel@infradead.org>
Message-ID: <56033C10.2040708@linaro.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 09/23/2015 02:03 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-09-23 at 22:51 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>
>> But if the device ID is assigned already, why would it hurt to
>> actually use it?
>
> It doesn't hurt at all, as long as we understand that there was no need
> to assign it a device ID at all, at least for Linux's benefit. And as
> long as it doesn't set a precedent that makes other people think they
> need to do so.

It really depends on the people who writing the ASL code (DSDT),
I'm not sure if Windows will use _DSD and how to use it, but
firmware guys may just use the device ID to make the firmware
to be usable both by Linux and Windows, and that's reasonable
I think.

Thanks
Hanjun