[Ksummit-2012-discuss] [ATTEND] Complex dependencies in device model

Stephen Warren swarren at wwwdotorg.org
Wed Jun 20 16:54:56 UTC 2012


On 06/20/2012 10:12 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 12:43:00PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
>>  - Breakout session on firmware provided data: ACPI and FDT.  Is it
>>    feasible/possible to use similar bindings and support code for
>>    both?  Vendors are pushing for ACPI on ARM; do we really need it?
> 
> If there's any realistic chance of AARCH64 being a mixture of FDT and 
> ACPI then I don't think we should merge it until we have merged bindings 
> for drivers. Otherwise we'll just end up with ACPI and FDT versions of 
> the same drivers and nobody will want to take responsibility for 
> rationalising them.

With all the recent focus on ARM cleanup and reviews, I hope we can
catch this kind of thing, so such restrictions wouldn't be necessary.

Not merging the architecture support unless the drivers are merged first
somewhat creates a chicken/egg problem; should the drivers be merged
without any architecture to run on? I can easily see someone else
wanting that restriction...


More information about the Ksummit-2012-discuss mailing list