On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 02:30:52PM -0500, Corey Minyard wrote: > On 08/13/2012 10:15 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > >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? > > Here are the examples from the IPMI spec. I lied a little bit, > there are actually four standard interfaces (one can be on an > SMBus), but it's a different thing to manage, I think.
Does your patch produce all of the four variants you've identified? What fields (if any) are dynamic within the variants? -Kevin _______________________________________________ SeaBIOS mailing list [email protected] http://www.seabios.org/mailman/listinfo/seabios
