[PATCH v4 18/18] Documentation: ACPI for ARM64
Graeme Gregory
gg at slimlogic.co.uk
Wed Sep 17 16:40:36 PDT 2014
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 01:22:10AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 17 September 2014, Graeme Gregory wrote:
> > It sounds like from the discussions in other threads that ARM64 should
> > be following x86 and re-using DT bindings here. In which case there is
> > not need to submit things to UEFI organisation.
> >
> > What I got a little lost in has there been a formal decision about DT
> > bindings in _DSD?
>
> I think this is a discussion that still needs to happen: either we should
> recommend everyone to use _DSD in favor of the alternatives, or we
> should prohibit the use of _DSD. I have heard arguments both ways, but
> hopefully we can find an easy answer.
>
This discussion is just not going to happen until people at @redhat.com
and people who have currently announced/released hardware are actually
willing to start talking about it.
Id love to be able to put my foot down and ban the use of _DSD for
servers but I suspect that will not happen.
Graeme
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list