Re: [PATCH v3 04/17] ARM64 / ACPI: Introduce early_param for "acpi"

[Grant Likely]

On Wed, 10 Sep 2014 07:21:59 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 7:04 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > It's blindingly obvious that acpi=off is there to disable ACPI at boot.
> > We either support that option or we don't -- none of this `oh, well you
> > can use it in this specific case I suppose' rubbish. I'm not questioning
> > your use-case, but there's really no need to talk about an `orderly
> > adoption' when all you need to say is that your ACPI is busted and passing
> > acpi=off lets you boot with a devicetree.
> 
> Maybe we should set a taint bit or give some other indication that
> we're using a flag to work around breakage.

Nope. No taint. Maybe a log message, but there are perfectly valid
reasons to use acpi=off, such as the user has a DT for the hardware
that moves all the PM operations into the kernel-proper to tune for a
very specific use case. This moves outside the support envelope, but
that doesn't make it a bad thing or the wrong thing to do.

g.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/