Hi Simon,
-----"Simon Glass" <s...@chromium.org> schrieb: -----
> Betreff: [PATCH v2 30/35] x86: Allow devices to write an SSDT
>
> Call the new core function to write the SSDT. This is made up of fragments
> generated by devices that have the fill_ssdt() method.
>
> Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>
> ---
>
> Changes in v2: None
> Changes in v1:
> - Use OEM_TABLE_ID instead of ACPI_TABLE_CREATOR
> - Update ACPI_DSTATUS enum
> - Drop writing of coreboot tables
>
> arch/x86/lib/acpi_table.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/acpi/acpi_table.h | 6 ++++++
> 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/acpi_table.c b/arch/x86/lib/acpi_table.c
> index e96acf08d4..4658d88351 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/lib/acpi_table.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/lib/acpi_table.c
> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> #include <mapmem.h>
> #include <serial.h>
> #include <version.h>
> +#include <acpi/acpigen.h>
> #include <acpi/acpi_table.h>
> #include <asm/acpi/global_nvs.h>
> #include <asm/ioapic.h>
> @@ -354,6 +355,25 @@ static void acpi_create_spcr(struct acpi_spcr *spcr)
> header->checksum = table_compute_checksum((void *)spcr, header->length);
> }
>
> +void acpi_create_ssdt(struct acpi_ctx *ctx, struct acpi_table_header *ssdt,
> + const char *oem_table_id)
> +{
> + memset((void *)ssdt, '\0', sizeof(struct acpi_table_header));
> +
> + acpi_fill_header(ssdt, "SSDT");
> + ssdt->revision = acpi_get_table_revision(ACPITAB_SSDT);
> + ssdt->aslc_revision = 1;
> + ssdt->length = sizeof(struct acpi_table_header);
> +
> + acpi_inc(ctx, sizeof(struct acpi_table_header));
> +
> + acpi_fill_ssdt(ctx);
> +
> + /* (Re)calculate length and checksum. */
> + ssdt->length = ctx->current - (void *)ssdt;
> + ssdt->checksum = table_compute_checksum((void *)ssdt, ssdt->length);
> +}
> +
> /*
> * QEMU's version of write_acpi_tables is defined in drivers/misc/qfw.c
> */
> @@ -363,6 +383,7 @@ ulong write_acpi_tables(ulong start_addr)
> struct acpi_facs *facs;
> struct acpi_table_header *dsdt;
> struct acpi_fadt *fadt;
> + struct acpi_table_header *ssdt;
> struct acpi_mcfg *mcfg;
> struct acpi_madt *madt;
> struct acpi_csrt *csrt;
> @@ -418,6 +439,14 @@ ulong write_acpi_tables(ulong start_addr)
> acpi_create_fadt(fadt, facs, dsdt);
> acpi_add_table(ctx, fadt);
>
> + debug("ACPI: * SSDT\n");
> + ssdt = (struct acpi_table_header *)ctx->current;
> + acpi_create_ssdt(ctx, ssdt, OEM_TABLE_ID);
> + if (ssdt->length > sizeof(struct acpi_table_header)) {
> + acpi_inc_align(ctx, ssdt->length);
> + acpi_add_table(ctx, ssdt);
> + }
> +
> debug("ACPI: * MCFG\n");
> mcfg = ctx->current;
> acpi_create_mcfg(mcfg);
> diff --git a/include/acpi/acpi_table.h b/include/acpi/acpi_table.h
> index fe9b29f3f8..9068da24f5 100644
> --- a/include/acpi/acpi_table.h
> +++ b/include/acpi/acpi_table.h
> @@ -27,6 +27,12 @@
>
> struct acpi_ctx;
>
> +/* List of ACPI HID that use the coreboot ACPI ID */
> +enum coreboot_acpi_ids {
> + COREBOOT_ACPI_ID_CBTABLE = 0x0000, /* BOOT0000 */
> + COREBOOT_ACPI_ID_MAX = 0xFFFF, /* BOOTFFFF */
> +};
> +
I can't see how this new type is related to the patch? Is it here on purpose?
> /*
> * RSDP (Root System Description Pointer)
> * Note: ACPI 1.0 didn't have length, xsdt_address, and ext_checksum
> --
> 2.26.2.645.ge9eca65c58-goog
>
regards, Wolfgang
