On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 10:59:17AM +0800, Ming Huang wrote: > On 2/12/2019 2:51 AM, Leif Lindholm wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 01, 2019 at 09:34:29PM +0800, Ming Huang wrote: > >> Add PCI_OSC_SUPPORT for remaining host bridges to remove fail > >> output in kernel: > >> [ 103.478893] acpi PNP0A08:01: _OSC failed (AE_NOT_FOUND); > >> > >> Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.1 > >> Signed-off-by: Ming Huang <ming.hu...@linaro.org> > >> --- > >> Silicon/Hisilicon/Hi1620/Hi1620AcpiTables/Dsdt/Hi1620Pci.asl | 64 > >> ++++++++++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 64 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/Silicon/Hisilicon/Hi1620/Hi1620AcpiTables/Dsdt/Hi1620Pci.asl > >> b/Silicon/Hisilicon/Hi1620/Hi1620AcpiTables/Dsdt/Hi1620Pci.asl > >> index 4d9d9d95be68..86d8728b82f2 100644 > >> --- a/Silicon/Hisilicon/Hi1620/Hi1620AcpiTables/Dsdt/Hi1620Pci.asl > >> +++ b/Silicon/Hisilicon/Hi1620/Hi1620AcpiTables/Dsdt/Hi1620Pci.asl > >> @@ -17,6 +17,50 @@ > >> **/ > >> > >> //#include "ArmPlatform.h" > >> + > >> +/* > >> + See ACPI 6.1 Spec, 6.2.11, PCI Firmware Spec 3.0, 4.5 > >> +*/ > >> +#define PCI_OSC_SUPPORT() \ > > > > PCI0 and PCI6 already have _OSC entries. > > This macro ends up being used for 1-5 and 7-B. > > So calling it PCI_OSC_SUPPORT seems somewhat misleading. > > > > Then again, there is a lot of similarities between this macro and the > > existing entries. Could the same macro be used for 0 and 6? Or could > > the macro be split up into multiple parts and reused? > > When I make this patch, I try to rewrite PCI0/6 with the same macro, but > the macro don't support parameter. For spliting up multiple parts, if modify > something in future, the parts need to split up to smaller parts. So, if > need to rewrite PCI0/6 with macro, is it applicable to add another macro > PCI_OSC_SUPPORT_HOTPLUG?
Yes, that sounds like a good solution to me. Regards, Leif _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list email@example.com https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel