On 07/07/16 09:35, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 06.07.16 at 18:32, <boris.ostrov...@oracle.com> wrote:
On 07/06/2016 12:04 PM, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 03:04:59PM -0400, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
* Don't set HW_REDUCED_ACPI flags: this flag is only available starting with
ACPI v5
Hm, I still think HW_REDUCED_ACPI should be set for the time being,
considering that we don't provide PM timer or RTC for example. Not setting
this would be a violation of the ACPI specification, and would mean
introducing Xen specific hacks yet again to guest OSes, in order to disable
those devices.
Is the fact that HW_REDUCED_ACPI was introduced in ACPI v5 a problem?
Yes, because we build v2 tables and they are somewhat different.
So couldn't we switch to building v5 tables (or even v6) for PVH
(and perhaps re-using the "acpi=" config setting to allow specifying a
version - with any value above 1 indicating the requested version)? I
certainly agree that setting a v5 flag in a v2 table is bad (best we can
hope for is that any consumer would ignore such a flag).
FWIW, if we switch to ACPI v5.1 or later, it will be easier to merge the
ACPI building code with ARM.
Regards,
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
