On Wed, Sep 07, 2011 at 03:06:59PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > >> +#define XENPF_enter_acpi_sleep 51
> > > >> +struct xenpf_enter_acpi_sleep {
> > > >> + /* IN variables */
> > > >> + uint16_t pm1a_cnt_val; /* PM1a control value. */
> > > >> + uint16_t pm1b_cnt_val; /* PM1b control value. */
> > > > These are uint32_t in native Linux--why truncate in the API and not at
> > > > use?
> > >
> > > Does ACPI define them as 32 or 16 bit?
> >
> > The spec indicates that the length is variable and could be up to 32 bits
> > (AFAICT). And Linux uses 32b, which your other patch is truncating for
> > this call.
>
> Yikes! Well, looks like we need to fix the Xen ABI too. Lets get that fixed
> and also address all the other comments (thanks for looking at it) you pointed
> out.
So read up the ACPI spec and it says that the minimum is 2 bytes and does not
say anything about the maximum. The list of what the bits do stops at 16-bits
(the last two are reserved) so I think we are actually OK.
Albeit if the spec starts using more of them - then yes we will need to revist
this Xen ABI and potentially add a new call.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doing More with Less: The Next Generation Virtual Desktop
What are the key obstacles that have prevented many mid-market businesses
from deploying virtual desktops? How do next-generation virtual desktops
provide companies an easier-to-deploy, easier-to-manage and more affordable
virtual desktop model.http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51426474/
_______________________________________________
tboot-devel mailing list
tboot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tboot-devel
