ACPI vs DT at runtime

Arnd Bergmann arnd at
Mon Nov 18 10:10:32 EST 2013

On Monday 18 November 2013, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 07:10:51PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Sunday 17 November 2013 17:18:03 Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > > Simply using DT would help avoiding the awkward situation where a driver
> > > of a device only works with one of the two description formats and not
> > > the other.
> > Yes, but remember that Intel still have the problem on their embedded
> > systems, and will want to solve them.
> Has it been confirmed that Intel are going with ACPI for their embedded
> devices rather than SFI?  That would be nice given how awful SFI is and
> I have heard that before but I'm not sure I've seen anything official.

Possibly not all of Intel agrees to that, but I think that's what I've 
heard from Darrent Hart and David Woodhouse. I doubt you can get an
"official" confirmation about it. I also don't know if there is a follow-up
for the Intel CE4100 that started using DT[1].


[1] arch/x86/platform/ce4100/falconfalls.dts

More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list