On 1/4/22 10:15, Ani Sinha wrote:
On Tue, 4 Jan 2022, Stefan Berger wrote:
On 1/4/22 04:55, Igor Mammedov wrote:
On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 21:23:09 -0500
Stefan Berger <stef...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
Add missing device identification objects _STR and _UID. They will appear
why, does it break anything or it's just cosmetic?
I don't know about whether any software needs these entries but it's driven by
this:
https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/708
Ok so you might want to add
Resolves: https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/708
in the commit message. Please see:
https://www.qemu.org/docs/master/devel/submitting-a-patch.html#write-a-meaningful-commit-message
Ooops, I will change this here to Resolves:
Fixes: https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/708
as files 'description' and 'uid' under Linux sysfs.
Cc: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zha...@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com>
Cc: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com>
Cc: Ani Sinha <a...@anisinha.ca>
Fixes: https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/708
Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <stef...@linux.ibm.com>
Message-id: 20211110133559.3370990-3-stef...@linux.ibm.com
---
hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c | 1 +
hw/i386/acpi-build.c | 8 ++++++++
2 files changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c b/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c
index d0f4867fdf..f2514ce77c 100644
--- a/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c
+++ b/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c
@@ -229,6 +229,7 @@ static void acpi_dsdt_add_tpm(Aml *scope,
VirtMachineState *vms)
Aml *dev = aml_device("TPM0");
aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_HID", aml_string("MSFT0101")));
+ aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_STR", aml_string("TPM 2.0 Device")));
aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_UID", aml_int(0)));
Aml *crs = aml_resource_template();
diff --git a/hw/i386/acpi-build.c b/hw/i386/acpi-build.c
index 8383b83ee3..2fb70847cb 100644
--- a/hw/i386/acpi-build.c
+++ b/hw/i386/acpi-build.c
@@ -1812,11 +1812,15 @@ build_dsdt(GArray *table_data, BIOSLinker *linker,
dev = aml_device("TPM");
aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_HID",
aml_string("MSFT0101")));
+ aml_append(dev,
+ aml_name_decl("_STR",
+ aml_string("TPM 2.0
Device")));
} else {
dev = aml_device("ISA.TPM");
aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_HID",
aml_eisaid("PNP0C31")));
}
+ aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_UID", aml_int(1)));
why it's 1, and not 0 as in virt-arm?
Marc-Andre and I looked at machines with hardware TPMs and that's what we
found there as well, a '1'.
aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_STA", aml_int(0xF)));
crs = aml_resource_template();
@@ -1844,6 +1848,8 @@ build_dsdt(GArray *table_data, BIOSLinker *linker,
if (TPM_IS_CRB(tpm)) {
dev = aml_device("TPM");
aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_HID", aml_string("MSFT0101")));
+ aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_STR",
+ aml_string("TPM 2.0 Device")));
crs = aml_resource_template();
aml_append(crs, aml_memory32_fixed(TPM_CRB_ADDR_BASE,
TPM_CRB_ADDR_SIZE,
AML_READ_WRITE));
@@ -1851,6 +1857,8 @@ build_dsdt(GArray *table_data, BIOSLinker *linker,
aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_STA", aml_int(0xf)));
no necessary ^^^ empty line
fixed
+ aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_UID", aml_int(1)));
+
tpm_build_ppi_acpi(tpm, dev);
aml_append(sb_scope, dev);
