[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180119185353.GF13094@lunn.ch>
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2018 19:53:53 +0100
From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
To: Marcin Wojtas <mw@...ihalf.com>
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory@...aro.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"<netdev@...r.kernel.org>" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Antoine T?nart <antoine.tenart@...e-electrons.com>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>,
Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia@...e-electrons.com>,
Nadav Haklai <nadavh@...vell.com>,
Neta Zur Hershkovits <neta@...vell.com>,
Grzegorz Jaszczyk <jaz@...ihalf.com>,
Tomasz Nowicki <tn@...ihalf.com>,
Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [net-next: PATCH 0/8] Armada 7k/8k PP2 ACPI support
> Since I have a code that can be tested and easily modified to use
> different ACPI approaches with real platform MDIO controller
> (mvmdio.c) and NIC (mvpp2.c), in coming weeks I may be able to find
> some time to prepare a proof of concept based on GenericSerialBus.
> Please expect some RFC patches hopefully right after the coming merge
> window is closed.
It would also be interesting to know how the standardisation process
works.
I'm sure these is a FAQs, so maybe somebody could point us towards it.
Do we need to submit a proposed extension to the ACPI standard at the
same time as the patch? Should we not accept the code into Linux until
the proposal has been accepted? Or can we accept the code
provisionally, with the understanding that if the ACPI committee
rejects the extension, or suggest alternations, we can take the code
out of Linux without having to worry about backwards compatibility?
Thanks
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists