[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140917170235.GP7960@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 10:02:35 -0700
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>
Cc: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org, Liviu Dudau <Liviu.Dudau@....com>,
Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@...el.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Robert Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, Charles.Garcia-Tobin@....com,
Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@...aro.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Sudeep Holla <Sudeep.Holla@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 18/18] Documentation: ACPI for ARM64
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 04:58:10AM -0400, Jon Masters wrote:
> On 09/16/2014 09:44 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> >> +http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/_DSD-implementation-guide-toplevel.htm
> > How are individuals/companies who aren't UEFI members supposed to do
> > this? Aren't there IP issues involved in taking submissions from
> > non-members?
> Obviously, I'm not a lawyer, but I would note that the _DSD bindings
> aren't going into the core ACPI document. I think the specifics for non
> members of the UEFI to potentially contribute bindings need to be
> addressed. That said, at this point, the population of the UEFI forum is
> very well aligned with initial players (that this is the case is not
> entirely an accident, I went around to a few folks a year or so ago and
> made sure that they had become members in anticipation of this issue).
Are you sure you've covered all the vendors of off-SoC components who
might be involved? That's certainly already an issue with people doing
x86 machines (who aren't being bound by this spec but as a subsystem
maintainer how am I supposed to tell if the target is an ARM or x86
system?).
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists