On 28 July 2015 at 21:12, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 28 July 2015 at 11:27, Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 11:12:33AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> On 28 July 2015 at 11:08, Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> > On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 10:44:02AM +0100, Graeme Gregory wrote: >>> >> Added the match table and pointers for ACPI probing to the driver. >>> >> >>> >> This uses the same identifier for virt devices as being used for qemu >>> >> ARM64 ACPI support. >>> >> >>> >> http://git.linaro.org/people/shannon.zhao/qemu.git/commit/d0bf1955a3ecbab4b51d46f8c5dda02b7e14a17e >>> >> >>> >> Signed-off-by: Graeme Gregory <graeme.greg...@linaro.org> > >>> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI >>> >> +static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = { >>> >> + { "LNRO0005", }, >>> >> + { } >>> >> +}; >>> > >>> > Hmm - we have reserved QEMUXXXX in ASWG explicitly for this purpose. >>> > >>> > Pater - do you think it's a good idea to change this before QEMU 2.4 >>> > is released? >>> >>> Shannon's call, I guess. I don't know enough about ACPI to say. >>> I thought these ACPI IDs were already fixed because they were >>> what the kernel was looking for... > >> Apparently not :) > > Mmm. I'm not terribly happy about stuff being in QEMU before the > ACPI spec for it has been finalised. We should not be picking > stuff randomly on the fly... > > If we want to fix the ACPI IDs QEMU is using for 2.4 then we > really need to do that now (ie within the next day or two). > It is upto the owner of the QEMU prefix to allocate numbers. This is not an issue for ACPI spec at all.
Graeme _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
