On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 01:08:25PM -0700, Al Stone wrote:
On 11/13/2013 01:44 AM, Hanjun Guo wrote:
On 2013-11-13 15:59, Andrea Gallo wrote:
Al
I am not sure about this.
What if one day we have ARM vendors showing up with x86-like fake registers just to be fully fixed hw profile compliant and feeling they could be safer than with the resuced hw profile, for whichever reason?
I would suggest we have two flags, which would be both set in 99.9% of ARM platforms but maybe there could be a 0.1% where it is ARM and fixed profile one day?
I agree with Andrea. we can't just let ARM = HW-reduced, some OEM vendors may implement ACPI hardware one day.
Thanks Hanjun
Hrm. I was unaware that some vendors were already going down the path of full ACPI hardware. In that case, we should leave things as they are and if a particular vendor wants to have reduced HW the default (or not), then they can do that in their specific Kconfig items. So, I'm withdrawing this patch as unneeded.
I very much disagree with Andrea and Hanjun, we cannot design software for an infinite number of "what if?". Especially when its a complex system which requires testing. I very much doubt someone will come up with an emulated non reduced hardware platform on arm that just works on first boot. Considering they will have to do a lot of testing and probably code changes then one line in a config file is not a major extra bit of work.
Also consider if we do not push this patch we will be answering the question approximately once a day of why our ARM acpi code core dumps due to random memory access because someone forgot to set that flag in their .config.
Graeme