On Wed, Nov 25, 2020 at 2:05 PM Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 11/25/20 1:00 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > >> I'd assume that most drivers that have a acpi_device_id table do have > >> hardware that uses that ID and were not just cargo culted. > >> > >> For new drivers we should push back on unregistered IDs, but if there is > >> hardware that uses them we have to take the patches. > > Right. But at the same time we have to push the idea of proper IDs to > > the vendor companies, so they won't abuse ACPI specification anymore. > > The last couple of years have made me very cynical on this. Vendors will > ship whatever works, not what is correct. Yes, but with some vendors (esp. if they have their record in ACPI/PNP registry) we may insist to follow the process. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
