On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 08:36:15PM +1200, Huang, Kai wrote: > > > On 7/17/2017 10:54 PM, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 09, 2017 at 08:16:05PM +1200, Kai Huang wrote: > > > On physical machine EPC is exposed in ACPI table via "INT0E0C". Although > > > EPC > > > can be discovered by CPUID but Windows driver requires EPC to be exposed > > > in > > > ACPI table as well. This patch exposes EPC in ACPI table. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Kai Huang <kai.hu...@linux.intel.com> > > > --- > > > tools/firmware/hvmloader/util.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++ > > > tools/firmware/hvmloader/util.h | 3 +++ > > > > Is there any reason this needs to be done in hvmloader instead of > > libacpi? I'm mostly asking this because PVH guests can also get ACPI > > tables, so it would be good to be able to expose EPC to them using > > ACPI. > > Hi Roger, > > Thanks for comments. I didn't deliberately choose to do in hvmloader instead > of libacpi. It seems libxl only builds ACPI table when guest is HVM, and it > doesn't use any device model, and I think I have covered this part (see > changes to init_acpi_config). Is there anything that I missed?
dsdt.asl is only used for HVM guests, PVH guests basically get an empty dsdt + dsdt_acpi_info + processor objects populated by make_dsdt (see Makefile in libacpi), so they end up without the EPC Device block. It would be good if a new empty dsdt is created, that contains the Device EPC block, or a ssdt is used, and it's added to both HVM/PVH guests. Alternatively you could also code the EPC Device block in mk_dsdt, but that's going to be cumbersome IMHO. Thanks, Roger. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
