Despite claim, no properties are defined in the rscv- namespace #198
Comments
|
You are right. I think this is a place holder for any property to be defined under rscv- namespace. The DSD guide (https://github.com/UEFI/DSD-Guide/blob/main/src/dsd-guide.adoc#appendix-c-known-device-property-prefixes) allows to use vendor ACPI ID as the prefix for the property but vendor needs to manage those properties. For RISC-V, ACPI ID registered is RSCV. Hence, any one in future wants to define and use a new property under rscv- namespace, should register here first. I think that is the idea to have this section. |
|
We had some properties here initially, then - we didn't. Nevertheless, it makes sense to stake a claim to the rscv- namespace now. |
|
Marking this as won't fix given last two comments. If you're okay with that, please close the ticket @jhauser-us. |
|
The right response is not to leave the document making an obviously false statement. If you want to stake the claim to the |
The RVI-specific ACPI Device Properties section exists as a place holder to define standard DSD properties in the "rscv-" namespace. While there are no properties currently defined, it is the place where one can add new properties approved by appropriate RVI forum. Try to reword to make the intention clear. Fixes: riscv-non-isa#198 Signed-off-by: Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
The RVI-specific ACPI Device Properties section exists as a place holder to define standard DSD properties in the "rscv-" namespace. While there are no properties currently defined, it is the place where one can add new properties approved by appropriate RVI forum. Try to reword to make the intention clear. Fixes: riscv-non-isa#198 Signed-off-by: Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
The RVI-specific ACPI Device Properties section exists as a place holder to define standard DSD properties in the "rscv-" namespace. While there are no properties currently defined, it is the place where one can add new properties approved by appropriate RVI forum. Try to reword to make the intention clear. Fixes: riscv-non-isa#198 Signed-off-by: Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
|
It is the consensus of the Architecture Review Committee that Section 6.3, "RVI-specific ACPI Device Properties", needs a non-normative note clarifying that the table of
should be made non-normative, preferably moved into the same non-normative note. In my opinion, it makes more sense for this non-normative note to follow the table, which would require "below table" be changed appropriately. (Note, by the way, that the words above and below are not adjectives, so it's not gramatically correct to say "above table" or "below table".) |
|
Thanks @jhauser-us . Let me update as per your suggestion. |
ARC suggested to move details about git PR to non-normative text below the table and to mention that currently the table which defines the DSD properties under riscv- namespace is empty. Fixes: riscv-non-isa#198 Signed-off-by: Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
Section 6.3, "RVI-specific ACPI Device Properties", says, "This section defines the
_DSDdevice properties in therscv-namespace." However, the only properties actually mentioned in this section are for UART devices, and if I'm not mistaken, these are not defined in therscv-namespace. (Right?)In short, I believe this section says it defines properties in the
rscv-namespace but then doesn't do so.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: