Re: [PATCH] arm64/acpi: make ACPI boot preference configurable

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On 2/28/2018 11:07 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-02-28 at 00:29 +0530, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 8:14 PM, Jonathan Toppins <jtoppins@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > wrote:
> > > On 02/27/2018 07:40 AM, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> > > For arm64 DT is suppose to *not* be the preferred method, yet still
> > > DT
> > > is preferred if the firmware provides both tables to the kernel.
> > However several arm64 products in embedded applications are still not
> > SBSA/SBBR compliant (and I have worked on a couple of such
> > implementations earlier) and still use bootloaders like u-boot (and
> > also closed-source implementations) which have no support for ACPI
> > currently and still rely on a DT to pass the system hardware
> > information to the kernel.
> > So far only open source implementation of a ACPI compliant firmware is
> > EDK2/UEFI which supports ACPI as the preferred boot method
> You mean for non-x86?
>
> >   and I am
> > not sure if all u-boot/in-house firmware implementations are planned
> > to be ported over to EDK2/UEFI for embedded applications.
> Why do you need that? ACPI (if you are talking about ACPI only, w/o EFI)
> is supported in U-Boot for few x86 SoCs/platforms. Moreover, one of them
> had never been shipped with ACPI/EFI complaint services in firmware and
> ACPI layer is purely done in U-Boot.
Right, let alone Chromebooks. :-)