On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 04:28:52AM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 09 December 2013, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > People are trying to deploy ACPI-based embedded x86, and most of the > > ACPI/DT integration discussion seems to have been based on the idea that > > this is a worthwhile thing to support. If we're not interested in doing > > so then we should probably make that a whole kernel decision rather than > > a per architecture one. > Well, except it's not an architecture independent decision. An embedded > x86 SoC will still be very much like a PC, just with a few things added > in and some other bits left out, and you can already describe it mostly It's not just the SoC, it's also the rest of the board. The patches the Intel guys are submitting at the minute are mainly for the off-SoC devices at least as far as I noticed. This'll impact anyone who ends up using ACPI, we need to at least pay attention to what's going on there. > with plain ACPI-5.0. Also, there are only a couple of different non-PC style > devices that Intel is integrating into their SoCs, so we're talking > about a few dozen device drivers here. It's going to be way more than that for the whole system, and you can't assume that all the system integrators are going to pay a blind bit of notice to the reference designs. Some will just clone them but others will bin them and do their own thing.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
