linux-kernel - Re: [Linaro-acpi] [RFC part1 PATCH 1/7] ACPI: Make ACPI core running without PCI on ARM64

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <201312102100.20570.arnd@arndb.de>
Date:	Tue, 10 Dec 2013 21:00:20 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	"linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
	"Russell King - ARM Linux" <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	"patches@...aro.org" <patches@...aro.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Tomasz Nowicki <tomasz.nowicki@...aro.org>,
	"linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"rob.herring@...xeda.com" <rob.herring@...xeda.com>
Subject: Re: [Linaro-acpi] [RFC part1 PATCH 1/7] ACPI: Make ACPI core running without PCI on ARM64

On Tuesday 10 December 2013, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 04:28:52AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Monday 09 December 2013, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> 
> > > People are trying to deploy ACPI-based embedded x86, and most of the 
> > > ACPI/DT integration discussion seems to have been based on the idea that 
> > > this is a worthwhile thing to support. If we're not interested in doing 
> > > so then we should probably make that a whole kernel decision rather than 
> > > a per architecture one.
> 
> > Well, except it's not an architecture independent decision. An embedded
> > x86 SoC will still be very much like a PC, just with a few things added
> > in and some other bits left out, and you can already describe it mostly
> 
> It's not just the SoC, it's also the rest of the board.  The patches the
> Intel guys are submitting at the minute are mainly for the off-SoC
> devices at least as far as I noticed.  This'll impact anyone who ends up
> using ACPI, we need to at least pay attention to what's going on there.

Yes, but I'm not that worried about off-soc stuff, which tends to be
off the much simpler variety: a few MMIO or PIO registers, IRQs,
GPIOs or (with ACPI-5.0) devices on i2c and spi buses.

> > with plain ACPI-5.0. Also, there are only a couple of different non-PC style
> > devices that Intel is integrating into their SoCs, so we're talking
> > about a few dozen device drivers here.
> 
> It's going to be way more than that for the whole system, and you can't
> assume that all the system integrators are going to pay a blind bit of
> notice to the reference designs.  Some will just clone them but others
> will bin them and do their own thing.

They won't be able to change the on-chip components for obvious reasons.

	Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/