On 2013-12-10 0:55, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 04:35:04PM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >> On Monday 09 December 2013, Hanjun Guo wrote: >>> On 2013-12-9 19:50, Catalin Marinas wrote: >>>> On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 04:12:24AM +0000, Hanjun Guo wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I think the concern here is that ACPI is only for server platform or not. >>>>> >>>>> Since ACPI has lots of content related to power management, I think ACPI >>>>> can be used for mobile devices and other platform too, not only for ARM >>>>> servers, and with this patch, we can support both requirement. >>>> >>>> 'Can be used' is one thing, will it really be used is another? I don't >>>> think so, it was (well, is) difficult enough to make the transition to >>>> FDT, I don't see how ACPI would solve the current issues. >> >> Exactly. In particular we don't want people to get the wrong idea about >> where we are heading, so making it possible to use this code on embedded >> systems for me is a reason *not* to take the patch. > > I agree. > >>>> I see ACPI as a server distro requirement and there are indeed benefits >>>> in abstracting the hardware behind standard description, AML. Of course, >>>> this would work even better with probe-able buses like PCIe and I'm >>>> pretty sure this would be the case on high-end servers. But even if a >>>> server distro like RHEL supports a SoC without PCIe, I would expect them >>>> to only provide a single binary Image with CONFIG_PCI enabled. >>>> >>>> This patch is small enough and allows ACPI build with !CONFIG_PCI for >>>> the time being but longer term I would expect such SoCs without PCI to >>>> be able to run on a kernel with CONFIG_PCI enabled. >>> >>> Yes, we will support PCI in ACPI in the long run, and we just make PCI >>> optional for ACPI in this patch. >> >> Do you mean there is a problem running your code with PCI /enabled/ at the >> moment? If so, I'd suggest fixing that instead since you will have to fix >> it anyway. > > CONFIG_PCI does not exist on arm64 yet (we have some internal patches > but may not be ready to be posted before the holidays; they try to share > code with other archs, so more discussions before merging). We could add > CONFIG_PCI and some dummy functions on arm64 for development (not to be > upstreamed) or Hanjun could continue to use the current patch before we > get PCI working. Thanks for the suggestion, I will continue to use the current patch, and I will rework or rebase this one when PCI is working. Hanjun -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
