RFC: Mezzanine handling for 96boards
Get series with b4
b4 am [email protected]Versions newest first
- v1 Latest0 of 5 patches 0 repliesNew
Patches in v1 No applies recorded yet
None of the 5 patches the cover letter announces are in this archive.
Reviews trailers per patch
No Reviewed-by, Acked-by or Tested-by trailers for v1 yet.
Cover letter [Dev] [PATCH 0/5] RFC: Mezzanine handling for 96boards
Quoted 7 lines · Daniel Thompson
Quoted 4 lines · Linus Walleij
- I am especially curious about input from Andy and Mika from the Intel/ACPI camp on what they have seen for non-discoverable plug-in boards. Does this problem even exist in the Intel world, or not...
Quoted 5 lines
I'm also interested in the "what about ACPI" question?
Using C makes describing a board in ACPI fairly easy. AFAICT allocating IDs to a board rather than its included components is fairly natural for ACPI.
Yes, they have this problem - they have plug in modules on for example the minnowboard and some of their other reference platforms. They have overlays working for ACPI, these have their own problems in that they don't appear to have the equivalent of DMI data (at least the patches people are sending indicates that they don't) which is unfortuate as the idiomatic thing for ACPI is as you say to key huge chunks of data of quirk tables based on the DMI information for their boards.
They don't to my knowledge have generic connectors or anything like
that, it's just patches to the base ACPI.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 488 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20180619/fed9da48/attachment-0001.sig>