From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754531AbaIQB5p (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Sep 2014 21:57:45 -0400 Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:43812 "EHLO cavan.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752714AbaIQB5n (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Sep 2014 21:57:43 -0400 Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 02:57:34 +0100 From: Matthew Garrett To: Hanjun Guo Cc: Mark Rutland , linaro-acpi@lists.linaro.org, Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Lv Zheng , Rob Herring , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Daniel Lezcano , Robert Moore , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Grant Likely , Liviu Dudau , Charles.Garcia-Tobin@arm.com, Robert Richter , Jason Cooper , Arnd Bergmann , Marc Zyngier , Jon Masters , Mark Brown , Bjorn Helgaas , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Graeme Gregory , Randy Dunlap , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sudeep Holla , Olof Johansson Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 18/18] Documentation: ACPI for ARM64 Message-ID: <20140917015734.GD31214@srcf.ucam.org> References: <1410530416-30200-1-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <1410530416-30200-19-git-send-email-hanjun.guo@linaro.org> <20140917014410.GC31214@srcf.ucam.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140917014410.GC31214@srcf.ucam.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mjg59@cavan.codon.org.uk X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on cavan.codon.org.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 02:44:10AM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 10:00:16PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote: > > +No code shall be accepted into the kernel unless it complies with the released > > +standards from UEFI ASWG. If there are features missing from ACPI to make it > > +function on a platform, ECRs should be submitted to ASWG and go through the > > +approval process. > > Similar question here. Is the expectation that all ARM vendors will > become UEFI contributors? I should also add that this is inconsistent with how we've managed things in the x86 world - there's a great deal of ACPI functionality implemented that's not covered in the spec. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org