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  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]
Date:	Mon, 05 Jan 2015 21:16:30 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <>
Cc:	Catalin Marinas <>,
	Hanjun Guo <>,
	Mark Rutland <>,
	"" <>,
	Will Deacon <>,
	Lv Zheng <>, Rob Herring <>,
	Lorenzo Pieralisi <>,
	Al Stone <>,
	Daniel Lezcano <>,
	Robert Moore <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>,
	Charles Garcia-Tobin <>,
	Robert Richter <>,
	Jason Cooper <>,
	Marc Zyngier <>,
	Liviu Dudau <>,
	Mark Brown <>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <>,
	"" <>,
	"" <>,
	Randy Dunlap <>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <>,
	"" <>,
	Sudeep Holla <>,
	Olof Johansson <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 18/18] Documentation: ACPI for ARM64

On Monday 05 January 2015 13:13:02 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > since passing no DT tables to OS but
> > acpi=force is missing is a corner case, we can do a follow up patch to
> > fix that, does it make sense?
> Not entirely. Why would no dtb and no acpi=force be a corner case? I
> thought this should be the default when only ACPI tables are passed, no
> need for an additional acpi=force argument.

We don't really support the case of only ACPI tables for now. The expectation
is that you always have working DT support, at least for the next few years
as ACPI features are ramping up, and without acpi=force it should not try
to use ACPI at all.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists