Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 3 Jul 2023 15:23:07 +0100
From:   Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
To:     Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
CC:     =?utf-8?B?6L+Q6L6J5bSU?= <cuiyunhui@bytedance.com>,
        <ardb@kernel.org>, <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>, <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>, <rminnich@gmail.com>,
        <mark.rutland@arm.com>, <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
        <rafael@kernel.org>, <lenb@kernel.org>, <jdelvare@suse.com>,
        <yc.hung@mediatek.com>, <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>,
        <allen-kh.cheng@mediatek.com>,
        <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>,
        <tinghan.shen@mediatek.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>, <geshijian@bytedance.com>,
        <weidong.wd@bytedance.com>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] riscv: obtain ACPI RSDP from FFI.
Message-ID: <20230703-operation-mankind-778882d8d350@wendy>
References: <20230702095735.860-1-cuiyunhui@bytedance.com>
 <20230703-71f67eb66a037f5c0fb825c6@orel>
 <CAEEQ3w=7tBHyG=CvuktPN5cvfpY6ayamnbry6eOYxMDrPN+oZg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230703-6ac90a2de15f1017bc0ced74@orel>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="E+2R2X9wOGgH+Gca"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230703-6ac90a2de15f1017bc0ced74@orel>
Precedence: bulk

--E+2R2X9wOGgH+Gca
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 04:17:07PM +0200, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2023 at 09:30:10PM +0800, =E8=BF=90=E8=BE=89=E5=B4=94 wro=
te:
> > On Mon, Jul 3, 2023 at 9:01=E2=80=AFPM Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicr=
o.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > (This is a reply to a non-existent cover letter.)
> >=20
> > This has been discussed many times with Ard, Please refer to :
> > https://patches.linaro.org/project/linux-acpi/patch/20230426034001.16-1=
-cuiyunhui@bytedance.com/
>=20
> There's nothing in that thread that convinces me this is a good idea.
> Indeed, afaict from that thread, Ard nacked this. It was only when it
> was suggested that arch/riscv would own the code, that he stopped
> complaining about it. I wouldn't call that an endorsement.

In fact, he expressly said that it would then be up to the RISC-V
maintainers as to what to do:
	But please check with the RISC-V maintainers
	if they are up for this, and whether they want to see this mechanism
	contributed to one of the pertinent specifications.


--E+2R2X9wOGgH+Gca
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEABYIAB0WIQRh246EGq/8RLhDjO14tDGHoIJi0gUCZKLZywAKCRB4tDGHoIJi
0lN2AQDpIYP//3WSQfuOdQ5ge5coGys/iiBPLD9RjiOuc+OMJAD/bZh8USr333vM
nyvylIQXi4vnoVBU3XUmLLWvRqRzpgE=
=n7aW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--E+2R2X9wOGgH+Gca--