On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 11:07:06 AM Darren Hart wrote:
On 11/25/14 10:43, Mark Brown wrote:
On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 10:33:01AM -0800, Darren Hart wrote:
On 11/25/14 09:21, Mark Brown wrote:
Given the design of _DSD is to share with DT and we already have device tree bindings for the device we should be using, it's not clear to me if we want to grind them all through UEFI and I suspect they'd be unhappy if we tried but pretty much all audio CODECs are good candidates for use with ACPI given the new hardware designs Intel have so if we are doing it I ought to be bouncing everyone to UEFI forum.
Right, I realized between sending and driving into the office that my statement might be construed this way. I meant *new* _DSD bindings should go through the ACPI/UEFI forum. Where we can reuse DT bindings, we should absolutely do that, agreed. We should still document this and link to the DT binding so it can be referenced and used even when Linux is not the target OS.
Link from where - do we want to talk to the ACPI/UEFI forum and figure out some kind of fast track process for them to add an "it's already covered by DT, see here" entry to their database for example? We also ought to work out how to make sure ACPI IDs are registered there as well, should be possible to have something simple as part of that.
This is a current topic with the ACPI working group. We have the following document:
http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/_DSD-device-properties-UUI...
I don't know if we want to have a list of them here, or if a separate document is needed. The important point is that it is independent from the ACPI specification itself so that it can be updated out of band with the specification, and not be subject to rather plodding pace that would imply.
Rafael, I've missed several of these meetings unfortunately, and I'm not sure if we've closed on this point. Do you know?
This hasn't been discussed a lot at the meetings I attended.
The bindings management process is being set up within the UEFI Forum, but I'm not sure if/how the existing DT bindings documented in the kernel tree are going to be covered by it ATM.