On 5/22/26 09:10, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
Hi Heinrich,
[....]
--- /dev/null
+++ b/lib/efi_selftest/efi_selftest_acpi.c
@@ -0,0 +1,75 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
+/*
+ * efi_selftest_acpi
+ *
+ * Copyright 2026, Heinrich Schuchardt <[email protected]>
+ *
+ * Check ACPI configuration table availability and root table presence.
+ */
+
+#include <efi_selftest.h>
+#include <acpi/acpi_table.h>
+
+static const efi_guid_t acpi2_guid = EFI_ACPI_TABLE_GUID;
+static const efi_guid_t acpi1_guid = EFI_GUID_EFI_ACPI1;
+
+/**
+ * efi_st_acpi_execute() - execute ACPI selftest
+ *
+ * Return: status code
+ */
+static int efi_st_acpi_execute(void)
+{
+ struct acpi_rsdp *rsdp;
+ struct acpi_table_header *table;
+ u32 rsdt_addr32;
+ u64 xsdt_addr64;
+ uintptr_t rsdt_addr;
+ uintptr_t xsdt_addr;
+
+ rsdp = efi_st_get_config_table(&acpi2_guid);
+ if (!rsdp)
+ rsdp = efi_st_get_config_table(&acpi1_guid);
Isn't having both RSDT and XSDT a valid case?
IOW the test looks fine, but wouldn't it be better to check for both
unconditionally?
Yes, if pointers to both tables exist, we probably should check both
signatures.
Best regards
Heinrich
