On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 22:05:41 -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
> Put this table before MCFG so that it matches the order that coreboot uses
> when passing tables to Linux. This is a cosmetic change since the order of
> the tables does not otherwise matter.
The patch looks like it's doing the opposite of what the commit
message says. Rebasing issue, or am I being daft? (If this is a stack
operation, use of stack terminology in the commit message would be
more daft-friendly.)
/
Leif
> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>
> ---
>
> arch/x86/lib/acpi_table.c | 12 ++++++------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/acpi_table.c b/arch/x86/lib/acpi_table.c
> index 83b92e2a4c..694e92c158 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/lib/acpi_table.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/lib/acpi_table.c
> @@ -408,18 +408,18 @@ ulong write_acpi_tables(ulong start_addr)
> acpi_create_fadt(fadt, facs, dsdt);
> acpi_add_table(ctx, fadt);
>
> - debug("ACPI: * MADT\n");
> - madt = ctx->current;
> - acpi_create_madt(madt);
> - acpi_inc_align(ctx, madt->header.length);
> - acpi_add_table(ctx, madt);
> -
> debug("ACPI: * MCFG\n");
> mcfg = ctx->current;
> acpi_create_mcfg(mcfg);
> acpi_inc_align(ctx, mcfg->header.length);
> acpi_add_table(ctx, mcfg);
>
> + debug("ACPI: * MADT\n");
> + madt = ctx->current;
> + acpi_create_madt(madt);
> + acpi_inc_align(ctx, madt->header.length);
> + acpi_add_table(ctx, madt);
> +
> debug("ACPI: * CSRT\n");
> csrt = ctx->current;
> acpi_create_csrt(csrt);
> --
> 2.25.0.341.g760bfbb309-goog
>
