On Tuesday 06 January 2015 11:37:08 Jon Masters wrote:
> On 01/06/2015 09:16 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 02:05:12PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> On Tuesday 06 January 2015 11:29:29 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> >> We will work on this both on ASWG and linux ACPI driver
On 01/06/2015 09:16 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 02:05:12PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Tuesday 06 January 2015 11:29:29 Catalin Marinas wrote:
>> We will work on this both on ASWG and linux ACPI driver side, as Dong
>> and Charles pointed out, _OSI things can
On 01/06/2015 06:20 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> Now, what's preventing a vendor firmware from providing only ACPI
> tables? Do we enforce it in some way (arm-acpi.txt, kernel warning etc.)
> that both DT and ACPI are supported, or at least that dts files are
> merged in the kernel first?
I know
ang.s...@huawei.com; Randy Dunlap; Rafael J. Wysocki; linux-
> ker...@vger.kernel.org; Sudeep Holla; Olof Johansson
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 18/18] Documentation: ACPI for ARM64
>
> On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 02:05:12PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Tuesday 06 January 2015 11:2
On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 02:05:12PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 06 January 2015 11:29:29 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > >> We will work on this both on ASWG and linux ACPI driver side, as Dong
> > > >> and Charles pointed out, _OSI things can be solved in ACPI spec, when
> > > >> that is
On Tuesday 06 January 2015 11:29:29 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > >> We will work on this both on ASWG and linux ACPI driver side, as Dong
> > >> and Charles pointed out, _OSI things can be solved in ACPI spec, when
> > >> that is done, we can modify the kernel driver to fix the problems above.
> > >
On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 01:51:27PM +, G Gregory wrote:
> On 6 January 2015 at 11:20, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 08:16:30PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >> On Monday 05 January 2015 13:13:02 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> >> > > since passing no DT tables to OS but
> >> > > a
On 2015年01月06日 21:54, G Gregory wrote:
On 6 January 2015 at 13:50, Hanjun Guo wrote:
On 2015年01月06日 19:29, Catalin Marinas wrote:
On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 11:11:07AM +, Hanjun Guo wrote:
On 2015年01月05日 19:05, Catalin Marinas wrote:
On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 09:39:24AM +, Hanjun Guo w
On 6 January 2015 at 13:50, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2015年01月06日 19:29, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 11:11:07AM +, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2015年01月05日 19:05, Catalin Marinas wrote:
On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 09:39:24AM +, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>
> On 2
On 6 January 2015 at 11:20, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 08:16:30PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Monday 05 January 2015 13:13:02 Catalin Marinas wrote:
>> > > since passing no DT tables to OS but
>> > > acpi=force is missing is a corner case, we can do a follow up patch to
On 2015年01月06日 19:29, Catalin Marinas wrote:
On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 11:11:07AM +, Hanjun Guo wrote:
On 2015年01月05日 19:05, Catalin Marinas wrote:
On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 09:39:24AM +, Hanjun Guo wrote:
On 2014年12月25日 01:18, Catalin Marinas wrote:
[...]
In addition to the above and _D
On Tue, Jan 06, 2015 at 11:11:07AM +, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2015年01月05日 19:05, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 09:39:24AM +, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> >> On 2014年12月25日 01:18, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> >> [...]
> >>>
> >>> In addition to the above and _DSD requirements/banning,
On Mon, Jan 05, 2015 at 08:16:30PM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday 05 January 2015 13:13:02 Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > > since passing no DT tables to OS but
> > > acpi=force is missing is a corner case, we can do a follow up patch to
> > > fix that, does it make sense?
> >
> > Not entirel
On 2015年01月05日 19:05, Catalin Marinas wrote:
On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 09:39:24AM +, Hanjun Guo wrote:
On 2014年12月25日 01:18, Catalin Marinas wrote:
[...]
In addition to the above and _DSD requirements/banning, I would also add
some clear statements around:
_OSC: only global/published capabi
On Monday 05 January 2015 13:13:02 Catalin Marinas wrote:
>
> > since passing no DT tables to OS but
> > acpi=force is missing is a corner case, we can do a follow up patch to
> > fix that, does it make sense?
>
> Not entirely. Why would no dtb and no acpi=force be a corner case? I
> thought this
On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 11:23:14AM +, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2014年12月25日 01:18, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 02:37:14PM +0100, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> >> +Booting using ACPI tables
> >> +-
> >> +The only defined method for passing ACPI tables to the ker
On Sun, Jan 04, 2015 at 09:39:24AM +, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2014年12月25日 01:18, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> [...]
> >
> > In addition to the above and _DSD requirements/banning, I would also add
> > some clear statements around:
> >
> > _OSC: only global/published capabilities are allowed. For
> >
On 2014年12月25日 01:18, Catalin Marinas wrote:
[...]
In addition to the above and _DSD requirements/banning, I would also add
some clear statements around:
_OSC: only global/published capabilities are allowed. For
device-specific _OSC we need a process or maybe we can ban them entirely
and rely o
On 2 Jan 2015, at 09:28, Hanjun Guo wrote:
>>> On 2015年01月02日 04:04, Graeme Gregory wrote:
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 04:34:46PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
On 2014年12月31日 04:13, ashw...@codeaurora.org wrote:
Hi Hanjun,
Overall the document looks good to us. Some minor clarific
Hi Graeme,
On 2015年01月02日 04:04, Graeme Gregory wrote:
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 04:34:46PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
On 2014年12月31日 04:13, ashw...@codeaurora.org wrote:
Hi Hanjun,
Overall the document looks good to us. Some minor clarifications below.
-- Forwarded message --
F
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 04:34:46PM +0800, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2014年12月31日 04:13, ashw...@codeaurora.org wrote:
> >Hi Hanjun,
> >
> >Overall the document looks good to us. Some minor clarifications below.
> >
> >>-- Forwarded message --
> >>From: Graeme Gregory
> >>
> >>Add docum
On 31 December 2014 at 03:34, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2014å¹´12æ31æ¥ 04:13, ashw...@codeaurora.org wrote:
>> Hi Hanjun,
>>> +ASWG
>>> +
>>> +The following areas are not yet fully defined for ARM in the 5.1
>>> version
>>> +of the ACPI specification and are expected to be worked through in th
On 2014年12月31日 04:13, ashw...@codeaurora.org wrote:
Hi Hanjun,
Overall the document looks good to us. Some minor clarifications below.
-- Forwarded message --
From: Graeme Gregory
Add documentation for the guidelines of how to use ACPI
on ARM64.
Signed-off-by: Graeme Gregory
Hi Hanjun,
Overall the document looks good to us. Some minor clarifications below.
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Graeme Gregory
>
> Add documentation for the guidelines of how to use ACPI
> on ARM64.
>
> Signed-off-by: Graeme Gregory
> Signed-off-by: Al Stone
> Signed-off-b
Hi,
On 2014年12月25日 01:18, Catalin Marinas wrote:
Hi,
Some thoughts before the end of the year. I won't be able to follow up
until around 5th of January though.
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 02:37:14PM +0100, Hanjun Guo wrote:
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/arm64/arm-acpi.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,323 @@
+A
On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 05:18:15PM +, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 02:37:14PM +0100, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> > +ACPI drivers should only look at one specific ASL object -- the _DSD object
> > +-- for device driver parameters (known in DT as "bindings", or "Device
> > +Propertie
Hi Catalin,
Good feedback. In particular, though we have only one example of _DSD (network
parameters because the hardware might be reset post boot and some of it is not
sophisticated enough to preserve programmed MAC and parameters such as PHy type
that will require reloading, both because dri
Hi,
Some thoughts before the end of the year. I won't be able to follow up
until around 5th of January though.
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 02:37:14PM +0100, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/arm64/arm-acpi.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,323 @@
> +ACPI on ARMv8 Servers
> +-
Hi Timur,
On 2014年12月19日 04:04, Timur Tabi wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 8:37 AM, Hanjun Guo wrote:
If acpi=force is used, the kernel
+will ONLY use device configuration information contained in the ACPI tables.
Based on this statement, ...
+In order for the kernel to load and use ACPI t
On 2014年12月19日 04:01, Suravee Suthikulanit wrote:
On 10/17/2014 8:37 AM, Hanjun Guo wrote:
From: Graeme Gregory
Add documentation for the guidelines of how to use ACPI
on ARM64.
Signed-off-by: Graeme Gregory
Signed-off-by: Al Stone
Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo
---
Documentation/arm64/arm-a
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 8:37 AM, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> If acpi=force is used, the kernel
> +will ONLY use device configuration information contained in the ACPI tables.
Based on this statement, ...
> +In order for the kernel to load and use ACPI tables, the UEFI implementation
> +MUST set the ACP
On 10/17/2014 8:37 AM, Hanjun Guo wrote:
From: Graeme Gregory
Add documentation for the guidelines of how to use ACPI
on ARM64.
Signed-off-by: Graeme Gregory
Signed-off-by: Al Stone
Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo
---
Documentation/arm64/arm-acpi.txt | 323
32 matches
Mail list logo
