Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 27 Aug 2020 00:06:57 +0300
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
        kuldip dwivedi <kuldip.dwivedi@puresoftware.com>,
        linux-spi <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Qiang Zhao <qiang.zhao@nxp.com>,
        Pankaj Bansal <pankaj.bansal@nxp.com>,
        Varun Sethi <V.Sethi@nxp.com>,
        tanveer <tanveer.alam@puresoftware.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: spi-fsl-dspi: Add ACPI support
Message-ID: <20200826210657.z526xjhhkq6vkxgr@skbuf>
References: <20200821131029.11440-1-kuldip.dwivedi@puresoftware.com>
 <20200822183342.6sdhp6yq6i7yvdia@skbuf>
 <CAHp75VeNXy1jWNWMuZc0bfXruKc3=0H4ezwpE8jbj6GLYk5QBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200826204108.reuy7ieqabutwuwo@skbuf>
 <20200826204547.GU4965@sirena.org.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200826204547.GU4965@sirena.org.uk>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 09:45:47PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 11:41:08PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 10:34:04PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
> > > Theoretically you may declare your HID in the same / similar way as
> > > PRP0001 and use same compatible strings and all other DT properties
> > > (when they make sense and not duplicate ACPI functionality).
> > > But better if ACPI people can tell you (I Cc'ed Rafael and ACPI
> > > mailing list) if it is gonna work.
>
> > Something doesn't look right about PRP0001, what's the catch?
>
> Microsoft decided not to implement support for it in Windows, it's
> essentially there for embedded style x86 platforms running Linux so they
> don't need to reimplement so many wheels and can just reuse existing DT
> bindings but it causes problems if you want to run Windows (and possibly
> some of the enterprise Linux distros, I can't remember if any of them
> had concerns about it) on the platform.

So if a silicon vendor doesn't care about Windows, what incentive does
it have to even register an official ACPI/PNP ID for its devices?