The DSD Rules doc has been stagnant for bit because of discussion and
concerns about wholesale-DT-import. Much of the language and proposed
rules are about addressing this concern. The main worry is that the
PRP0001 HID would allow using a DT style "compatible" string to bind a
driver. This in turn would make it easier for folk to import whole DTs,
which may duplicate and clash with existing ACPI functionality. The
"compatible" property also goes against the grain, in that instead of
being device and vendor specific, it is generic. In ARM we have been
discussing the PRP0001 ID method of binding drivers, and the rules of the
DSD rules doc and I wanted to summarise where we’ve got to. We now agree
that PRP0001 is needed, but we think there is some additional work
required to make this fly:
will need to produce documentation describing the purpose of
the ID, and we’d be happy to work on the wording for that.
- To address the concern of wholesale-DT-import, we will need to come up
with a set of rules and guidelines on DT porting specifically. This is
something that we could host alongside the DSD rules doc perhaps. We will
be making some proposals here.
- The use of PRP0001 should be discouraged for entirely new devices, as
this is really more about porting existing drivers.
From my own perspective, I’d be happy to drop the discussion on how to
phrase which ID methods are valid for an OS to use in driver binding. The
original language suggested by Rafael would works for me.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may
also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose,
or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.