linux-kernel - Re: [Linaro-acpi] [PATCH v7 04/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Introduce early_param for "acpi" and pass acpi=force to enable ACPI

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Thu, 29 Jan 2015 23:30:53 +0000
From:	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To:	Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>
Cc:	Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
	Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	"phoenix.liyi@...wei.com" <phoenix.liyi@...wei.com>,
	Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	"linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org" <linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org>,
	Marc Zyngier <Marc.Zyngier@....com>,
	Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
	Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"grant.likely@...aro.org" <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	"wangyijing@...wei.com" <wangyijing@...wei.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	"hanjun.guo@...aro.org" <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>
Subject: Re: [Linaro-acpi] [PATCH v7 04/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Introduce
 early_param for "acpi" and pass acpi=force to enable ACPI

On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 11:16:22PM +0000, Jon Masters wrote:
> On 01/29/2015 06:11 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> 
> > Sorry Jon but statements like this make me wonder whether we should
> > simply let the whole ARM ACPI be an out of tree distro business. We
> > spend a long time discussing OS-agnostic firmware implementation,
> > planning mini-summits, just to get certain Linux distro representative
> > stating that the kernel-firmware interface we discuss here only matters
> > for those planning to follow upstream. Certain Linux distros will play
> > by other rules.
> 
> Oh, don't take it that way - I just mean that if someone needs a
> different ACPI always on, they can do that separately.

And that's exactly what I'm trying to get consensus on. ACPI always on
together with DT always on, subject to config options being enabled (not
patching). It's up to firmware (and vendor) to provide only ACPI tables
to the kernel if not interested in DT. In such case I don't want to see
additional kernel parameters. But if the firmware provides both, then it
is a user choice which one to use, defaulting to DT.

-- 
Catalin
--
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/