On 01/08/16 05:21, Xiao Guangrong wrote: > > > On 01/07/2016 05:21 PM, Igor Mammedov wrote: >> On Wed, 6 Jan 2016 01:07:45 +0800 >> Xiao Guangrong <guangrong.xiao@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> On 01/06/2016 12:43 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >>> >>>>>> Yes - if address is static, you need to put it outside >>>>>> the table. Can come right before or right after this. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Also if OperationRegion() is used, then one has to patch >>>>>>> DefOpRegion directly as RegionOffset must be Integer, >>>>>>> using variable names is not permitted there. >>>>>> >>>>>> I am not sure the comment was understood correctly. >>>>>> The comment says really "we can't use DataTableRegion >>>>>> so here is an alternative". >>>>> so how are you going to access data at which patched >>>>> NameString point to? >>>>> for that you'd need a normal patched OperationRegion >>>>> as well since DataTableRegion isn't usable. >>>> >>>> For VMGENID you would patch the method that >>>> returns the address - you do not need an op region >>>> as you never access it. >>>> >>>> I don't know about NVDIMM. Maybe OperationRegion can >>>> use the patched NameString? Will need some thought. >>> >>> The ACPI spec says that the offsetTerm in OperationRegion >>> is evaluated as Int, so the named object is allowed to be >>> used in OperationRegion, that is exact what my patchset >>> is doing (http://marc.info/?l=kvm&m=145193395624537&w=2): >> that's not my reading of spec: >> " >> DefOpRegion := OpRegionOp NameString RegionSpace RegionOffset RegionLen >> RegionOffset := TermArg => Integer >> TermArg := Type2Opcode | DataObject | ArgObj | LocalObj >> " >> >> Named object is not allowed per spec, but you've used ArgObj which is >> allowed, even Windows ok with such dynamic OperationRegion. > > Sorry, Named object i was talking about is something like this: > Name("SOTH", int(0x10000)) > > I am checking acpi spec, and this is a formal NamedObj definition in > that spec, my fault. > >> >>> >>> + dsm_mem = aml_arg(3); >>> + aml_append(method, aml_store(aml_call0(NVDIMM_GET_DSM_MEM), >>> dsm_mem)); >>> >>> + aml_append(method, aml_operation_region("NRAM", AML_SYSTEM_MEMORY, >>> + dsm_mem, >>> TARGET_PAGE_SIZE)); >>> >>> We hide the int64 object which is patched by BIOS in the method, >>> NVDIMM_GET_DSM_MEM, to make windows XP happy. >> considering that NRAM is allocated in low mem it's even fine to move >> OperationRegion into object scope to get rid of IASL warnings >> about declariong Named object inside method, but the you'd need to >> patch it directly as the only choice for RegionOffset would be DataObject >> > > Yes, it is. So it is depends on the question in my reply of another thread: > http://marc.info/?l=kvm&m=145222487605390&w=2 > Can we assume that BIOS allocated address is always 32 bits? As far as OVMF is concerned: you can assume this at the moment, yes. Thanks Laszlo > If yes, we also need not make ssdt as v2. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
