[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54D26DA6.9000700@linaro.org>
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 12:06:14 -0700
From: Al Stone <al.stone@...aro.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>,
Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@...aro.org>,
Sudeep Holla <Sudeep.Holla@....com>,
Jon Masters <jcm@...hat.com>,
Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Charles.Garcia-Tobin@....com, phoenix.liyi@...wei.com,
Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>,
Ashwin Chaugule <ashwinc@...eaurora.org>,
suravee.suthikulpanit@....com,
Mark Langsdorf <mlangsdo@...hat.com>, wangyijing@...wei.com,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linaro-acpi@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 21/21] arm64: ACPI: additions of ACPI documentation
for arm64
On 02/04/2015 11:12 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 05:40:20PM -0700, Al Stone wrote:
>> Much removed to cut down the size on this and to highlight a couple of
>> specific sections pertinent to the ACPI on ARMv8 TODO List.....
>
> This is of course good practice when replying to anything!
Yup :).
>>> +_DSD 6.2.5 To be used with caution. If this object is used, try +
>>> to use it within the constraints already defined by the + Device
>>> Properties UUID. Only in rare circumstances + should it be necessary
>>> to create a new _DSD UUID. + + In either case, submit the _DSD
>>> definition along with + any driver patches for discussion, especially
>>> when + device properties are used. A driver will not be +
>>> considered complete without a corresponding _DSD + description. Once
>>> approved by kernel maintainers, + the UUID or device properties must
>>> then be registered + with the UEFI Forum; this may cause some
>>> iteration as + more than one OS will be registering entries.
>
>> [snip...]
>
>> So, this is my attempt to encapsulate what I think people want to have
>> happen around the use of _DSD; I just want to make sure I point it out so
>> it doesn't inadvertently get lost somehow.
>
>> Is this far too little? Is it sufficient? If it only addresses part of
>> the concerns, what did I miss?
>
> This does take us back to the issue of how exactly one is supposed to
> register/approve _DSD bindings and what format they're written in which I
> don't think we ever fully got to the bottom of it (there's some stuff on
> the UEFI website but it's definitely looking a bit placeholderish).
Right; the UEFI stuff is indeed place-holder-ish. This is one of the places
where Linux is really driving what happens in the spec, so it's a little bit
of a chicken-and-egg problem. I will go repair the UEFI data once I have
a better understanding of what's needed.
I guess what I'm trying to figure out is: how specific does this need to be?
Does it need to be a step-by-step description, something like
Documentation/bindings/submitting-patches.txt, or something far more detailed
than that, with templates to fill out, and circles and arrows and a paragraph
on the back explaining each one [0] :)?
[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice%27s_Restaurant
--
ciao,
al
-----------------------------------
Al Stone
Software Engineer
Linaro Enterprise Group
al.stone@...aro.org
-----------------------------------
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists