lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Dec]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCHv2 01/12] acpi: Create subtable parsing infrastructure
Date


> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-acpi-
> owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Rafael J. Wysocki
> Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 1:45 AM
> To: Busch, Keith <keith.busch@intel.com>
> Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; ACPI Devel
> Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>; Linux Memory Management List
> <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>; Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@kernel.org>;
> Hansen, Dave <dave.hansen@intel.com>; Williams, Dan J
> <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 01/12] acpi: Create subtable parsing infrastructure
>
> On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 2:05 AM Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
> wrote:
> >

Hi Rafael and Bob,

> > Parsing entries in an ACPI table had assumed a generic header
> > structure that is most common. There is no standard ACPI header,
> > though, so less common types would need custom parsers if they want go
> > through their sub-table entry list.
>
> It looks like the problem at hand is that acpi_hmat_structure is incompatible
> with acpi_subtable_header because of the different layout and field sizes.

Just out of curiosity, why don't we use ACPICA code to parse static ACPI tables
in Linux?

We have a disassembler for static tables that parses all supported tables. This
seems like a duplication of code/effort...

Erik
>
> If so, please state that clearly here.
>
> With that, please feel free to add
>
> Reviewed-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
>
> to this patch.
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-12-20 00:20    [W:0.064 / U:0.124 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site