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: <20131210202323.GJ11468@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Tue, 10 Dec 2013 20:23:23 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
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 Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 09:00:20PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 10 December 2013, Mark Brown wrote:

> > 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.

That's not my experience especially once you get into phone type
hardware - there's not much complexity difference when gluing things
into the system and the fact that it's connected by the board increases
the amount of flexibility that has to be coped with.  I don't see a
substantial difference between the two cases.  To be honest I'm a bit
concerned about what we're going to see given where ACPI's at as a spec.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)