On 2015/11/11 16:36, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 11 November 2015 at 01:29, Shannon Zhao <shannon.z...@linaro.org> wrote: >> On 2015/11/11 4:56, Wei Huang wrote: >>> I found this was caused by the change of "_HID" name for GPIO device. It >>> was changed from "LNRO0009" (v1) to "ARMH0061" (v2), which doesn't match >>> with my stock guest kernel PL061 driver. After changing the guest >>> kernel, it is working again. So: > >> Thanks very much for your help. The reason why I change the _HID is >> based on the _HID 0f PL011 which is ARMH0011. About the _HID of ARM >> company's devices, I have to say that I didn't see which _HID they >> should be at any public place. I heard(maybe it's not correct) there is >> a _HID list of ARM devices. If so, I think ARM should publish them in >> public, otherwise the only thing we can do is to guess or refer to >> existing _HID. > > Please confirm for definite the right _HID values; don't guess > them. If you say you don't know the right HID values and mark > a patchset as RFC we can go and try to find out the right > answers. If you just put guesses into a patchset we could > easily end up committing the patch with the wrong info... > Of course I will try to find the right _HID and tried before. But what I want to say is why ARM doesn't publish these _HIDs if there is really a list( I don't think this is a secret). And if there is not a list, ARM should create one since these devices belong to ARM.
Thanks, -- Shannon
