On Sun, Jul 28, 2024 at 02:07:01PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > On 28 July 2024 11:37:04 BST, "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > >Glad you asked :) > > Heh, I'm not sure I'm so glad. Did I mention I hate ACPI? Perhaps it's still > not too late for me just to define a DT binding and use PRP0001 for it :) > > >Long story short, QEMUVGID is indeed out of spec, but it works > >both because of guest compatibility with ACPI 1.0, and because no one > >much uses it. > > > I think it's reasonable enough to follow that example and use AMZNVCLK (or > QEMUVCLK, but there seems little point in both) then?
I'd stick to spec. If you like puns, QEMUC10C maybe?
