On 05/01/2015 02:24 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
No, that is not a reasonable assumption to make. All the ARM64 server systems we have today are using DT only and we will of course keep supporting systems like that.
This is what drives me crazy about Linux kernel development. I've been doing this for 15 years, and I still get random emails that contradict everything I've been told to date.
I was repeatedly told over the past year by multiple people that ARM64 server == ACPI, no ifs, ands, or buts.
This means we need a DT binding for the driver, and the ACPI portion that creates the platform device should be split out from the main driver.
Well, someone who actually has a DT-based ARM64 server system (which is not me) should come up with such a definition.
I'm hoping that my driver can be accepted without DT support, and that someone else who is interested in running my driver on an SBSA device tree platform can add what's missing.
-- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-watchdog" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
