On 11/18/2013 02:25 PM, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 12:26:11AM -0500, Jon Masters wrote: >> On 11/18/2013 12:19 AM, Jon Masters wrote: >> >>> It's going to be a messy thing to even attempt. Look, I wish we had a >>> time machine and could have done this whole thing years ago, but I'm not >>> sure it would have gone differently. ACPI is something a lot of people >>> emotionally hate. In the Enterprise space myself and others *need* it >>> (along with UEFI) to have a scalable solution that doesn't result in an >>> onslaught of customer support calls, which a non-standards body backed >>> moving target of DTB will do. And besides all of the big boys are going >>> to be using ACPI whether it's liked much or not. >> >> A while ago I mentioned producing a series of requirements that >> articulates what Red Hat thinks an ARMv8 server looks like. Suffice it >> to say that such requirements do in fact exist, and will be made >> available in the not too distant future as part of another doc. > > It's nice that there's an unpublished document with a RedHat logo on it > somewhere that mandates what we, the kernel project, is going to do. > > I thought both RedHat and you personally knew that we don't do things > that way in the kernel, Jon. Published or not. Olof, I understand completely. My hands are unfortunately tied and it's not of my making (or my employer) on this front. In the ARM space, there are a lot of entities involved when it comes to anything at all, and you know what the NDA situation is like. I am pushing to get a few things out there for broader consumption. Jon. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
