From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Shevchenko Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 19:35:37 +0300 Subject: [PATCH v5 14/29] acpi: Add a binding for ACPI settings in the device tree In-Reply-To: References: <20200408225749.171380-1-sjg@chromium.org> <20200408165737.v5.14.I7842b2dd0d6b475301fc044c6640d8089873053f@changeid> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 7:16 PM Wolfgang Wallner wrote: > I have learned through the previous review discussions aspects about this > binding which are not captured in the current patch. I tried to incorporate > these findings, the modified text is proposed below. > > Additionally, I realized that I still don't understand how some parts of the > proposed binding are intended to work. I have highlighted these aspects with > a TODO note. Please have a look. > > regards, Wolfgang > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Devices > ======= > > Device bindings are described by their own individual binding files. > U-Boot provides for some optional properties which are documented here. > > ACPI-related properties: > - acpi,compatible : ACPI devices may report a _HID or _CID of "PRP0001", in > which case they are expected to provide a _DSD object with a "compatible" > property. No, this is simple incorrect. PRP0001 should not be mentioned at all. _DSD() as I said in the other thread is orthogonal to the ACPI ID. > The value of this "compatible" property is specified by > "acpi,compatible". > See also section 6.2.5 of [1] as well as [2-3] for details. > > TODO: will PRP0001 be used as _HID or as _CID? None. Please, forget about PRP0001. > TODO: How does this work togheter with "acpi, compatible"? (assuming > "acpi,compatible" implies a _HID of "PRP0001") Ditto. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko