On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 02:32:04AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tuesday, October 11, 2016 02:44:29 PM Mark Brown wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 01:44:46AM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > My primary concern is the addition of what appear to be phandles > > introduced as part of this patch set. The previous discussion had been > > that we'd enable simple DT bindings which don't need inter-device > > references and that those needed more careful study. This appears to > > be changing that. > Yes, it does, but why exactly do you think this is wrong? > Is there any specific problem it creates that you can point to? It means there's now nothing in the code that says that we shouldn't just map a DT binding with inter-device references into ACPI and that any future conversions just look like API usage cleanups. > > The way ARM implements this is that you don't get the DT and ACPI > > simultaneously, they're both present in the firmware and the OS picks > > which one it wants to use at runtime. > So for the boards I'm talking about ACPI is the only realistic choice. There shouldn't be any technical limiation here.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
