We have a bunch of macros in include/acmacros.h -- like this: ACPI_MOVE_16_TO_16(d, s)
> -----Original Message----- > From: Toshi Kani [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2016 8:38 AM > To: Moore, Robert; [email protected]; Williams, Dan J > Cc: Zheng, Lv; [email protected]; [email protected]; linux- > [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] ACPI/NFIT: Update Control Region Structure to > comply ACPI 6.1 > > On Tue, 2016-03-01 at 15:13 +0000, Moore, Robert wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Toshi Kani [mailto:[email protected]] > > > Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 1:55 PM > > > To: [email protected]; Williams, Dan J > > > Cc: Moore, Robert; Zheng, Lv; [email protected]; > > > [email protected] g; [email protected]; > > > [email protected]; [email protected]; Toshi Kani > > > Subject: [PATCH v2 1/3] ACPI/NFIT: Update Control Region Structure > > > to comply ACPI 6.1 > > > > > > ACPI 6.1, Table 5-133, updates NVDIMM Control Region Structure as > > > follows. > > > - Valid Fields, Manufacturing Location, and Manufacturing Date > > > are added from reserved range. No change in the structure size. > > > - IDs defined as SPD values are arrays of bytes. The spec > > > clarified that they need to be represented as arrays of bytes > > > as well. > > > > > > This patch makes the following changes to support this update. > > > - Change 'struct acpi_nfit_control_region' to reflect the update. > > > SPD IDs are defined as arrays of bytes, so that they can be > > > treated in the same way regardless of CPU endianness and are > > > not miss-treated as little-endian numeric values. > > > > > > I don't think we are going to start changing the ACPI tables defined > > in the ACPICA headers because of this. We do in fact have macros for > > this purpose. > > Can you elaborate what macros you suggest to use for this purpose? > > Thanks, > -Toshi
