On 01/28/2015 12:14 PM, Catalin Marinas wrote:

quoted

quoted

So it looks like there's a whole conversation about this already in
this thread that I didn't notice.  However, reading through all of it,
I still don't understand sure why the presence of ACPI tables is
insufficient to enable ACPI.

Because ACPI on arm64 is still experimental, no matter how many people
claim that it is production ready in their private setups.

Fair enough.  Does this mean that passing "acpi=force" on the kernel 
command line is a requirement for ARM64 servers?

quoted

quoted

In what situation would we want to ignore ACPI tables that are
present?

When DT tables are also present (and for the first platforms, that's
highly recommended, though not easily enforceable at the kernel level).

My understanding is that the EFI stub creates a device tree (and it 
contains some important information), so I don't understand how we can 
ever have an ACPI-only platform on ARM64 servers.

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the
Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.