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