Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:23:02 +0100 | From | Matthew Garrett <> | Subject | Re: [RFC/PATCH 2.6.32] Simple Firmware Interface (SFI): initial support |
| |
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 04:00:55PM -0400, Len Brown wrote:
> But given that the hardware is fixed (it was fixed over a year ago), > the question becomes what does ACPI mean on such a platform? > It turns out that if you look at the ACPI spec and delete all the > things that could not possibly apply to MRST, then you are left > with very little.
Right, but instead you've effectively taken ACPI, done s/XSDT/SYST/ and then only supported a subset of the static tables and added some others. In return we gain two implementations to debug. I'm absolutely fine with the concept of a cut-down ACPI, but I'm pretty uncomfortable with it being implemented as a single-vendor spec. Right now SFI's a reimplementation of functionality we already have for the benefit of a single chipset, whereas instead it could have been a refactoring of the ACPI codebase to allow vendors to include whatever subset of the ACPI functionality they felt necessary.
-- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
|  |