From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/15] ACPI: Document ACPI device specific properties Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2014 16:55:56 +0200 Message-ID: <2072038.Vir4futZot@wuerfel> References: <1410868367-11056-1-git-send-email-mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> <3986527.L7rDZAb4g5@wuerfel> <20141002143809.GQ1786@lahna.fi.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20141002143809.GQ1786@lahna.fi.intel.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mika Westerberg Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , Linus Walleij , Alexandre Courbot , Dmitry Torokhov , Bryan Wu , Lee Jones , Grant Likely , Aaron Lu , Darren Hart List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 02 October 2014 17:38:09 Mika Westerberg wrote: > On Thu, Oct 02, 2014 at 04:29:03PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > Is this a limitation in the way that the AML syntax and compiler works, > > or is this a decision you made specifically for the _DSD syntax and that > > could still be changed if there is an overwhelming interest? > > It is only limitation of the _DSD device property UUID specification and > our implementation. It can be changed if needed. Ok, I see. I think it would be nice if this could be changed in order to avoid having to copy the #xxx-cells and xxx-names properties from DT, by providing a more natural syntax. I'm not blaming you though if you don't want to go through the pain of updating the spec though, and I won't complain loudly if you don't. Maybe someone else has an opinion on the matter. Arnd