ACPI vs DT at runtime

[Grant Likely]

On Mon, 18 Nov 2013 16:10:32 +0100, Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> wrote:
> 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].

Darren is using it to enable Minnowboard, and there is active work on
the GPIO, SPI and other subsystems to bring in ACPI support.

g.