[alsa-devel] [PATCH 1/2] ASoC: rt5677: Add ACPI device probing

[Grant Likely]

On Tue, 25 Nov 2014 22:40:53 +0100
, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw at rjwysocki.net>
 wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 08:27:22 PM Mark Brown wrote:
> > 
> > --ReaqsoxgOBHFXBhH
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> > Content-Disposition: inline
> > 
> > On Tue, Nov 25, 2014 at 09:31:27PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, November 25, 2014 11:07:06 AM Darren Hart wrote:
> > 
> > > > 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-UUID.pdf
> > 
> > > 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.
> > 
> > Al Stone (CCed) pointed me at the following two documents:
> > 
> > http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/web-page-v2.pdf
> > http://www.uefi.org/sites/default/files/resources/nic-request-v2.pdf
> > 
> > (the first one being the actual process in so far as it exists).  The
> > process appears to be to mail requests in a specific format to the ASWG
> > chairperson (the address is apparently supposed to be awsg at uefi.org).
> > It looks like all the properties are expected to end up in one or more
> > PDF files like the second one.
> > 
> > My initial thought would be to require that we send any DT properties
> > defined for devices with ACPI identifiers registered there and hope the
> > volume doesn't DoS them.
> 
> We absolutely need to start registering the existing bindings in there, but
> that needs to be rate limited somehow, because the process may not be very
> efficient to start with.

Beyond having the document point to the existing DT binding
documentation, I think this is a non-starter. It won't be helpful for
anyone to have two separate repositories containing the same bindings.
They will get out of sync and we will have pain as a result.

For existing bindings we need to have a way to share the documentation,
and I don't think we can even talk about whether it makes sense to
migrate the documetation to the UEFI managed repo before the UEFI process is
fully flushed out.

g.