On Thursday 21 November 2013, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 04:29:44PM +0000, Grant Likely wrote: > > > We are pushing a lot of boundaries and doing things on ACPI that have > > never been done before. SPI, GPIOs, Clocks, Regulators, composite > > devices, key-value properties. All brand new territory, and the Linux > > world is driving a lot of it. > > This is a bit of a surprise and a significant concern. > > The whole point behind ACPI is that it's supposed to abstract away nearly > all of that, and not expose clocks, regulators and other things to > the kernel. If we're going to expose it, then we might as well go all > the way and do it with DT. I think you are talking about different things here: Grant's example was about embedded x86 adding these so they can reuse the kernel infrastructure we already have without changing their entire firmware, which I think is fine, but he also said in the past that we wouldn't have that on PC-style ARM servers. Other people are pushing for that though (for SoC-style ARM servers I suppose), as Russell mentioned earlier. Arnd -- 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
