On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 2:15 AM Schmauss, Erik <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto:linux-acpi- > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Dan Williams > > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 4:00 PM > > To: Schmauss, Erik <[email protected]> > > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <[email protected]>; Busch, Keith > > <[email protected]>; Moore, Robert <[email protected]>; > > Linux Kernel Mailing List <[email protected]>; ACPI Devel > > Maling List <[email protected]>; Linux Memory Management > > List <[email protected]>; Greg Kroah-Hartman > > <[email protected]>; Hansen, Dave > > <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 01/12] acpi: Create subtable parsing > > infrastructure > > > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 3:19 PM Schmauss, Erik > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:linux-acpi- > > > > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Rafael J. Wysocki > > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 1:45 AM > > > > To: Busch, Keith <[email protected]> > > > > Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <[email protected]>; ACPI > > > > Devel Maling List <[email protected]>; Linux Memory > > > > Management List <[email protected]>; Greg Kroah-Hartman > > > > <[email protected]>; Rafael J. Wysocki > > <[email protected]>; > > > > Hansen, Dave <[email protected]>; Williams, Dan J > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 01/12] acpi: Create subtable parsing > > > > infrastructure > > > > > > > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 2:05 AM Keith Busch > > <[email protected]> > > > > 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... > > > Hi Dan, > > > Oh, I thought acpi_table_parse_entries() was the common code. > > What's the ACPICA duplicate? > > I was thinking AcpiDmDumpTable(). After looking at this ACPICA code, > I realized that the this ACPICA doesn't actually build a parse tree or data > structure. > It loops over the data structure to format the input ACPI table to a file. > > To me, it seems like a good idea for Linux and ACPICA to share the same code > when > parsing and analyzing these structures. I know that Linux may emit warnings > that are specific to Linux but there are structural analyses that should be > the same (such as > checking lengths of tables and subtables so that we don't have out of bounds > access).
I agree. I guess the reason why it has not been done this way was because nobody thought about it. :-) So a project to consolidate these things might be a good one.
