LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Linus Walleij <email@example.com>
Cc: Alexandre Courbot <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Heikki Krogerus <email@example.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Darren Hart <email@example.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <email@example.com>,
Mika Westerberg <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: support for GPIO forwarding
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 17:12:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4006695.qV8Mor20ru@vostro.rjw.lan> (raw)
On Thursday, January 22, 2015 09:17:38 AM Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 10:25 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Yes, it can (in principle). In fact, we have a plan to refine it, but it is
> > going to take some time. Once we've done that, we'll see how painful it is to
> > "patch" ACPI tables this way in practice.
> > Also there is an ecosystem problem related to distributing such "patches".
> > Today, distributions don't need to worry about patching buggy platform
> > firmware, because they get workarounds in the kernel, but if we switch over
> > to the model in which platform firmware "overlays" need to be provided in
> > addition to it, then suddenly questions arise about who should be responsible
> > for making them available, how to avoid duplication of efforts between
> > distributions etc.
> > All of that needs to be clarified before we start making hard statements like
> > "No in-kernel workarounds for that!"
> OK so why can't the patching happen in the kernel?
> If the kernel anyway has to supply some kind of workaround for
> the issue, it is more a question of where to place it. Whether it does
> so by patching the ACPI tables or by detecting a bad ACPI thing
> and working around it at runtime in a certain driver doesn't really
> matter, does it?
It needs to know what to patch and how so the result is still consistent.
How do you think the kernel is going to figure that out?
> They are both in-kernel ACPI fixes, just that one
> of the mechanisms is generic.
I'm not following you here, sorry.
> I don't understand why this obsession with userspace having
> to do the ACPI table patching - if kernels should "just work" then
> put this stuff behind Kconfig and have it in the kernel.
This is not an obsession and your suggestion here leads to having custom
per-board kernels which is not supportable in the long term.
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-22 15:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-18 8:23 Heikki Krogerus
2015-01-08 8:25 ` Heikki Krogerus
2015-01-15 9:21 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-01-14 12:58 ` Linus Walleij
2015-01-14 16:32 ` Darren Hart
2015-01-15 9:28 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-01-15 9:40 ` Heikki Krogerus
2015-01-14 16:32 ` Darren Hart
2015-01-19 5:59 ` Alexandre Courbot
2015-01-19 11:53 ` Heikki Krogerus
2015-01-20 12:16 ` Linus Walleij
2015-01-20 21:25 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-01-22 2:57 ` Alexandre Courbot
2015-01-22 16:14 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-01-23 11:21 ` Heikki Krogerus
2015-01-23 15:14 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-01-26 13:06 ` Heikki Krogerus
2015-02-10 9:32 ` Alexandre Courbot
2015-02-10 15:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-12 12:46 ` Heikki Krogerus
2015-02-24 20:34 ` David Cohen
2015-02-25 1:34 ` Alexandre Courbot
2015-02-25 18:25 ` David Cohen
2015-03-07 22:13 ` Linus Walleij
2015-01-22 8:17 ` Linus Walleij
2015-01-22 16:12 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2015-01-30 14:48 ` Linus Walleij
2015-01-30 16:17 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2015-02-04 9:51 ` Linus Walleij
2015-02-04 14:11 ` Heikki Krogerus
2015-02-10 9:44 ` Alexandre Courbot
2015-02-12 12:38 ` Heikki Krogerus
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:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--subject='Re: [RFC PATCH] gpio: support for GPIO forwarding' \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
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).