From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>
Cc: Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: ACPI vs Device Tree - moving forward
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2013 22:30:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52184504.4070001@roeck-us.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130824045139.GA4840@srcf.ucam.org>
On 08/23/2013 09:51 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 09:45:10PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>
>> "What happens when you have an ACPI device that contains an interrupt in
>> _CRS and contains a different interrupt in an embedded FDT block?"
>>
>> Does the situation occur today, ie does it ever happen that one interrupt
>> for a device is specified (if that is the correct term) in _CRS and
>> another by some other means ?
>
> The only case I can think of is PCI, where we ignored the ACPI-provided
> resources until fairly recently. That was a somewhat reasonable thing to
> do, since the hardware still had to support pre-ACPI operating systems
> and so the non-ACPI information sources were typically correct.
>
> Other than that, I think we always trust the ACPI data.
>
Seems to me you answered your question. It should be possible
to do the same if you replace (ACPI, BIOS) with (ACPI, FDT).
Plus, hopefully there should be no reason to specify data in FDT
that is already provided through ACPI. If it is specified anyway,
its handling is a matter of policy.
Guenter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-24 5:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-20 19:26 ACPI vs Device Tree - moving forward Matthew Garrett
2013-08-20 20:51 ` Darren Hart
2013-08-20 20:57 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-08-20 21:03 ` Darren Hart
2013-08-20 21:13 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-20 21:36 ` Guenter Roeck
2013-08-20 21:11 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-20 23:29 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-21 15:57 ` Linus Walleij
2013-08-21 16:09 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-08-21 23:11 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-21 23:39 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-08-22 0:02 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-22 0:03 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-08-23 23:25 ` Darren Hart
2013-08-23 23:38 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-08-23 23:45 ` Darren Hart
2013-08-24 0:13 ` Guenter Roeck
2013-08-24 1:10 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-08-24 1:47 ` Guenter Roeck
2013-08-24 2:38 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-08-24 2:55 ` Guenter Roeck
2013-08-24 3:06 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-08-24 4:45 ` Guenter Roeck
2013-08-24 4:51 ` Matthew Garrett
2013-08-24 5:30 ` Guenter Roeck [this message]
2013-08-26 9:32 ` Linus Walleij
2013-08-26 10:48 ` Graeme Gregory
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=52184504.4070001@roeck-us.net \
--to=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=dvhart@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox