On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 09:47:50AM -0500, Corey Minyard wrote: > On 08/13/2012 01:25 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > >On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 08:22:12PM -0500, Corey Minyard wrote: > >>>Patch 2 is complex and I don't fully understand what it is doing. A > >>>quick scan leads me to believe it is constructing a dynamic SSDT - > >>>though it's not clear why a dynamic SSDT is needed and why the > >>>existing mechanism (see build_ssdt()) for generating dynamic SSDTs is > >>>not used. > >>It is constructing an addition to the DSDT table that is tacked on > >>to the end of that table if IPMI is present. It is complex, but > >>building ACPI namespace data is complex, and the data is not fixed > >>length. > >> > >You do not need to construct IPMI device dynamically in DSDT. Write it > >in AML and have _STA method that tells OSPM if device is present or not. > > There are lots of different options for IPMI devices. There are > three different interface types, with two string lengths. They can > all appear at arbitrary places in I/O or memory space. They can > have an interrupt or not. I would like to be able to represent all > off the possibilities so users can simulate any arbitrary machine > they want. > > I considered writing it in AML 8 times and figuring the offsets to > set the various values, but that seems rather messy to me. > How different are they. Can you give human readable example?
> If the real desire is to have a single IPMI device type at a single > address with a single interrupt always on, we could do that. The > BIOS would still need a way to know that the device was present or > not, so something will have to be passed. I'm not sure that reading > from the standard address to detect the device is reliable enough, > but that could be done, too. > > -corey -- Gleb. _______________________________________________ SeaBIOS mailing list SeaBIOS@seabios.org http://www.seabios.org/mailman/listinfo/seabios