lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Apr]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3] ARM64: ACPI: Update documentation for latest specification version
From
Date
On 04/08/2016 07:12 AM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 03:50:55PM -0600, Al Stone wrote:
>> On 03/28/2016 06:06 PM, Al Stone wrote:
>>> The ACPI 6.1 specification was recently released at the end of January
>>> 2016, but the arm64 kernel documentation for the use of ACPI was written
>>> for the 5.1 version of the spec. There were significant additions to the
>>> spec that had not yet been mentioned -- for example, the 6.0 mechanisms
>>> added to make it easier to define processors and low power idle states,
>>> as well as the 6.1 addition allowing regular interrupts (not just from
>>> GPIO) be used to signal ACPI general purpose events.
>>>
>>> This patch reflects going back through and examining the specs in detail
>>> and updating content appropriately. Whilst there, a few odds and ends of
>>> typos were caught as well. This brings the documentation up to date with
>>> ACPI 6.1 for arm64.
>>>
>>> Changes for v3:
>>> -- Clarify use of _LPI/_RDI (Vikas Sajjan)
>>> -- Whitespace cleanup as pointed out by checkpatch
>>>
>>> Changes for v2:
>>> -- Clean up white space (Harb Abdulhahmid)
>>> -- Clarification on _CCA usage (Harb Abdulhamid)
>>> -- IORT moved to required from recommended (Hanjun Guo)
>>> -- Clarify IORT description (Hanjun Guo)
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Al Stone <al.stone@linaro.org>
>>> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>>> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
>>> Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
>>> ---
>>> Documentation/arm64/acpi_object_usage.txt | 446 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>>> Documentation/arm64/arm-acpi.txt | 28 +-
>>> 2 files changed, 357 insertions(+), 117 deletions(-)
>>> [snip...]
>>
>> Ping? Any further comments or is this good to go?
>
> It would be nice to see an ack from some other ACPI people, if that's
> possible. Which tree were you planning to merge this through?
>
> Will
>

Agreed. I was hoping the ping would elicit some of that.

I assumed this would go through the arm64 tree since it's pretty specific
to the architecture.

--
ciao,
al
-----------------------------------
Al Stone
Software Engineer
Linaro Enterprise Group
al.stone@linaro.org
-----------------------------------

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-04-08 16:41    [W:0.461 / U:0.184 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site