On 2018/10/26 21:12, Andrew Lunn wrote: > On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 03:04:25AM +0000, Wang, Dongsheng wrote: >> On 2018/10/26 10:37, Timur Tabi wrote: >>> On 10/25/18 9:18 PM, Wang, Dongsheng wrote: >>>> But when I was reading Documentation/acpi/DSD-properties-rules.txt, my >>>> understanding is we should try to conform to DT bindings. So maybe ACPI >>>> doesn't have such a document, just DT bindings. >>> There was an attempt to document DSDs, but it was abandoned after a while. >>> >>> https://github.com/ahs3/dsd >>> >> Yes, here's a database concept, and I asked some Intel guys, the answer >> I got was there is no such database or document. :( > Hi Dongsheng > > If there is no clear documentation for ACPI, it becomes even more > important that the xgene code is refactored into a central location, > and you make use of it. We really need to avoid every ACPI ethernet > driver doing its own thing. However, without a document specifying MDIO and phy-handle, it is almost difficult for us to do this. Because maybe the ACPI device or property corresponding to each platform is different. Just like APM looks different to us. APM's MDIO adev doesn't describe the concept of port, and our platform does. Besides, I cannot get the ACPI table of APM or other manufacturers. The table of ACPI cannot be obtained from kernel source as easily as DT. We can't know without a platform to do ACPI dump. Unless some of the manufacturers have pushed the table to upstream. So I think we might have a hard time doing this without a document. And it's likely that this work involves code modifications by BIOS vendors. Cheers, Dongsheng
