| Message ID | 1464670986-10256-8-git-send-email-zhaoshenglong@huawei.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
Hello Shannon, On 31/05/16 06:02, Shannon Zhao wrote: > From: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@linaro.org> > > Currently there is only the table header in DSDT table. > > Signed-off-by: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@linaro.org> > --- > tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c b/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c > index c3b8fb4..7949635 100644 > --- a/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c > +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c > @@ -944,6 +944,20 @@ static void make_acpi_fadt(libxl__gc *gc, struct xc_dom_image *dom) > dom->acpitable_size += dom->acpitable_blob->fadt.size; > } > > +static void make_acpi_dsdt(libxl__gc *gc, struct xc_dom_image *dom) > +{ > + struct acpi_table_header *dsdt; > + > + /* Currently there is only the table header in DSDT table. */ What about the processor device objects? Regards,
Hi Shannon, On 16/06/16 07:25, Shannon Zhao wrote: > > > On 2016/6/7 21:42, Julien Grall wrote: >> Hello Shannon, >> >> On 31/05/16 06:02, Shannon Zhao wrote: >>> From: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@linaro.org> >>> >>> Currently there is only the table header in DSDT table. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhao@linaro.org> >>> --- >>> tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ >>> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c b/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c >>> index c3b8fb4..7949635 100644 >>> --- a/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c >>> +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c >>> @@ -944,6 +944,20 @@ static void make_acpi_fadt(libxl__gc *gc, struct >>> xc_dom_image *dom) >>> dom->acpitable_size += dom->acpitable_blob->fadt.size; >>> } >>> >>> +static void make_acpi_dsdt(libxl__gc *gc, struct xc_dom_image *dom) >>> +{ >>> + struct acpi_table_header *dsdt; >>> + >>> + /* Currently there is only the table header in DSDT table. */ >> >> What about the processor device objects? > > Ah, yes. It should add processor device objects. Since DSDT table is > special, what's your suggestion about how to generate DSDT table? Use > static table which X86 use(tools/firmware/hvmloader/acpi/mk_dsdt.c) or > import what QEMU uses? I would do the choice depending on what we need to expose through the DTST. If it is only dummy processor containers, then ~1500 lines of code (see qemu/hw/acpi/aml-build.c) seems a bit overkill. > I prefer the latter, but this will add more codes to libxl. What would be the benefits to build dynamically those tables? Regards,
diff --git a/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c b/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c index c3b8fb4..7949635 100644 --- a/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c +++ b/tools/libxl/libxl_arm.c @@ -944,6 +944,20 @@ static void make_acpi_fadt(libxl__gc *gc, struct xc_dom_image *dom) dom->acpitable_size += dom->acpitable_blob->fadt.size; } +static void make_acpi_dsdt(libxl__gc *gc, struct xc_dom_image *dom) +{ + struct acpi_table_header *dsdt; + + /* Currently there is only the table header in DSDT table. */ + dsdt = libxl__zalloc(gc, sizeof(*dsdt)); + make_acpi_header((void *)dsdt, "DSDT", sizeof(*dsdt), 2); + + dom->acpitable_blob->dsdt.table = (void *)dsdt; + /* Align to 64bit. */ + dom->acpitable_blob->dsdt.size = ROUNDUP(sizeof(*dsdt), 3); + dom->acpitable_size += ROUNDUP(dom->acpitable_blob->dsdt.size, 3); +} + static int prepare_acpi(libxl__gc *gc, libxl_domain_build_info *info, libxl__domain_build_state *state, struct xc_dom_image *dom) @@ -966,6 +980,7 @@ static int prepare_acpi(libxl__gc *gc, libxl_domain_build_info *info, make_acpi_gtdt(gc, dom); make_acpi_fadt(gc, dom); + make_acpi_dsdt(gc, dom); return 0; }