+U-Boot Mailing List Hi Steven,
On Thu, 19 Mar 2020 at 21:08, Steven Hao <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Simon: > > Most acpi table have no difference between x86 and arm. > For example, RSDP,XSDT,DSDT,SSDT,SPCR,FADT,MADT,GTDT,MCFG is same. > But FACS,IORT table may be different. > > I have a idea that the same apci tables should be defined in > /include/acpi_table folder, > and the different tables may be defined in /include/acpi_table/x86 folder or > /include/acpi_table/arm folder. Yes I have added almost all the structs to the generic acpi_table.h, except NHLT. (please can you avoid top-posting?) Regards, Simon > > Regards > Steven Hao > 2020-03-20 > > > > ________________________________ > 发件人: Simon Glass <[email protected]> > 发送时间: 2020年3月20日 0:18 > 收件人: Steven Hao <[email protected]> > 抄送: U-Boot Mailing List <[email protected]> > 主题: Re: [PATCH v3] arm: add acpi support for the arm > > Hi Steven, > > On Wed, 18 Mar 2020 at 00:46, Steven Hao <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Simon: > > > > Nowdays I get that you are updating the acpi in uboot. I want to ask for > > that > > could you support the arm platform or keep out a interface for adding > > arm-acpi. > > For example, the acpi_table.h file may be put in include folder, instead of > > arch/x86/include/asm folder. > > > > It is hard for me to know what ACPI bits ARM uses. Do you know? It > should be easy enough to move the code later if needed. > > Regards, > Simon > > > > Steven Hao > > 2020-03-18 > > ________________________________ > > 发件人: Simon Glass <[email protected]> > > 发送时间: 2019年12月28日 0:41 > > 收件人: Steven Hao <[email protected]> > > 抄送: Bin Meng <[email protected]>; Heinrich Schuchardt > > <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; > > [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; > > [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; > > [email protected] <[email protected]>; > > [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; > > [email protected] <[email protected]>; > > [email protected] <[email protected]>; > > [email protected] <[email protected]>; > > [email protected] <[email protected]>; > > [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; > > Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> > > 主题: Re: [PATCH v3] arm: add acpi support for the arm > > > > Hi, > > > > On Sun, 15 Dec 2019 at 18:54, Steven Hao <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > This problem seems like lay aside. > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > 发件人: Bin Meng <[email protected]> > > > 发送时间: 2019年11月27日 14:04 > > > 收件人: Simon Glass <[email protected]> > > > 抄送: Heinrich Schuchardt <[email protected]>; Steven Hao > > > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > > <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; > > > [email protected] <[email protected]>; > > > [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > > <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; > > > [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > > <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; > > > [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] > > > <[email protected]>; Andy Shevchenko > > > <[email protected]> > > > 主题: Re: [PATCH v3] arm: add acpi support for the arm > > > > > > Hi Simon, > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 11:42 AM Simon Glass <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Heinrich, > > > > > > > > On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 at 18:12, Heinrich Schuchardt <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On 11/26/19 12:40 AM, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 at 15:57, Heinrich Schuchardt > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On 11/25/19 3:42 AM, Steven Hao wrote:> 获取 Outlook for iOS > > > > > >> <https://aka.ms/o0ukef> > > > > > >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > >>> *主题:* Re: [PATCH v3] arm: add acpi support for the arm > > > > > >>> Hi Steven, > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 10:09 AM Steven Hao > > > > > >>> <[email protected]> > > > > > >>> wrote: > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Dear Bin： > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Firstly： > > > > > >>>> I know that acpi about x86 is existing. And it is usefull for x86 > > > > > >> platfporm. If it is used to arm platform，some modification may > > > > > >> have to > > > > > >> do. For example，facs table is useless for arm. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> In adition，The acpi table is writed statically and then modified > > > > > >> dynamically in my patch. It is a new method. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> I want to consult that whether my method is helpful or not. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>>> Secondly： > > > > > >>>> If i want to reuse the x86-acpi. I will overwrite the > > > > > >> write_acpi_tables function. But the definition about acpi > > > > > >> strcuture is > > > > > >> placed in arch/x86/include/asm directory. It can not be used to arm > > > > > >> plateform. If the acpi library need to surport for all platform，i > > > > > >> think > > > > > >> it should move to /include directory. > > > > > >>>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Yes, we all are aware that modifications are needed to the > > > > > >>> existing > > > > > >>> x86 ACPI support to support ARM. We don't want to create 2 ACP > > > > > >>> implementation in U-Boot. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Regards, > > > > > >>> Bin> Dear Bin： > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> I have a suggetion that the acpi specification definition such as > > > > > >>> all > > > > > >>> acpi table structure definition should be place in /include > > > > > >>> directory. > > > > > >>> and write_acpi_tables function can be placed in platform > > > > > >>> directory. > > > > > >>> Creating acpi table mothod can be diffrent between x86 and > > > > > >>> arm. > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> Thank you > > > > > >>> Steven Hao > > > > > >>> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Currently we are using CPU specific C files generating ACPI > > > > > >> tables, e.g. > > > > > >> arch/x86/cpu/tangier/acpi.c. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I would prefer if we would generate the ACPI tables and definition > > > > > >> blocks completely from text files instead of using C code. This > > > > > >> would > > > > > >> avoid any architecture specific code. > > > > > > > > > > > > I am finding with Apollo Lake that this isn't possible - we need to > > > > > > insert run-time information into the tables set up with .asl files. > > > > > > > > > > For device trees we generate the binary form with a compiler. Then we > > > > > patch the device tree with runtime information in > > > > > image_setup_libfdt(). > > > > > > > > > > Couldn't we go a similar way for ACPI? > > > > > > > > Yes that's my goal, except that some tables are generated wholesale > > > > from code (equivalent to entire nodes in DT). > > > > > > > > I had a bit of a look at how this is done in coreboot. It is pretty > > > > hard to follow as there are weak functions and the code jumps back and > > > > forth between generic code and SoC-specific code. But every device has > > > > ACPI operation and I think that makes sense. > > > > > > > > My current idea is to add a new optional acpi_ops struct pointer into > > > > each struct driver, to handle the ACPI table generation and other > > > > things needed by ACPI. Then devices that want to do ACPI things can do > > > > so. Then we need a new drivers/core/acpi.c file to handle things. > > > > > > > > > > Yes, this approach makes sense to me, for dynamic ACPI table generation. > > > > Just an update on this...I have some basic code for APL and am making > > progress. I expect to send patches by the end of January. > > > > Regards, > > Simon
