ACPI vs DT at runtime

[Grant Likely]

On Thu, 21 Nov 2013 17:01:22 +0000, Matthew Garrett <mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 04:29:44PM +0000, Grant Likely wrote:
> 
> > Personally, I think the issue of ACPI support should be taken on a
> > patch-by-patch basis. A lot of the things that need to be done are quite
> > discrete and fairly well contained. If the patches don't look that way
> > then push back on them. For the parts that look ready, go ahead and
> > merge it. Push back on the ones that don't.
> 
> I think the most valuable thing in ACPI is the static data tables. 
> Things like BERT, EINJ, HEST, MPST and the various other bits of RAS 
> functionality have value in the ARM world, and being able to share the 
> implementation is a benefit. But that can be implemented without 
> worrying about using ACPI for device discovery or interfacing.

/complete digression.../ As far as static tables are concerned, it would
be trivial to pull those into a DT system.

g.