From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Bhupesh Sharma <bhsharma@redhat.com>,
Jonathan Toppins <jtoppins@redhat.com>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
astone@redhat.com, Jonathan Masters <jcm@redhat.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Prarit Bhargava <prarit@redhat.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64/acpi: make ACPI boot preference configurable
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2018 11:10:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <395d024f-b710-3626-f004-e069de0b812b@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1519812442.10722.248.camel@linux.intel.com>
On 2/28/2018 11:07 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-02-28 at 00:29 +0530, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 8:14 PM, Jonathan Toppins <jtoppins@redhat.com
>>> wrote:
>>> On 02/27/2018 07:40 AM, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>> For arm64 DT is suppose to *not* be the preferred method, yet still
>>> DT
>>> is preferred if the firmware provides both tables to the kernel.
>> However several arm64 products in embedded applications are still not
>> SBSA/SBBR compliant (and I have worked on a couple of such
>> implementations earlier) and still use bootloaders like u-boot (and
>> also closed-source implementations) which have no support for ACPI
>> currently and still rely on a DT to pass the system hardware
>> information to the kernel.
>> So far only open source implementation of a ACPI compliant firmware is
>> EDK2/UEFI which supports ACPI as the preferred boot method
> You mean for non-x86?
>
>> and I am
>> not sure if all u-boot/in-house firmware implementations are planned
>> to be ported over to EDK2/UEFI for embedded applications.
> Why do you need that? ACPI (if you are talking about ACPI only, w/o EFI)
> is supported in U-Boot for few x86 SoCs/platforms. Moreover, one of them
> had never been shipped with ACPI/EFI complaint services in firmware and
> ACPI layer is purely done in U-Boot.
>
Right, let alone Chromebooks. :-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-28 10:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-27 6:05 [PATCH] arm64/acpi: make ACPI boot preference configurable Jonathan Toppins
2018-02-27 7:22 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-02-27 14:28 ` Jonathan Toppins
2018-02-27 14:54 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2018-02-27 14:55 ` Robin Murphy
2018-02-27 12:40 ` Bhupesh Sharma
2018-02-27 14:44 ` Jonathan Toppins
2018-02-27 17:05 ` Mark Rutland
2018-02-27 18:59 ` Bhupesh Sharma
2018-02-28 10:07 ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-02-28 10:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2018-02-28 10:32 ` Bhupesh Sharma
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=395d024f-b710-3626-f004-e069de0b812b@intel.com \
--to=rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=astone@redhat.com \
--cc=bhsharma@redhat.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=jcm@redhat.com \
--cc=jtoppins@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=prarit@redhat.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).