On Wed, Oct 05, 2011 at 10:15:26PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote: > Sure: > > - The DSDT is big and has several cross-functional users. Patching up > the DSDT for hotplug when the DSDT also has unrelated stuff (eg, > mouse) seems ugly. > > - The PCI hotplug stuff is generating a whole bunch of devices and the > dynamic code is effectively disabling the unwanted ones. It seems > nicer to dynamically generate the desired entries instead of bulk > generating and dynamically blanking. > > - The CPU hotplug has similar requirements, but is implemented > differently - it generates the CPU objects dynamically. It's not > desirable to bulk generate the CPU objects and "blank" them > dynamically, because 255 CPU objects would noticeably increase > SeaBIOS' static size. > > - Some time back there were patches floating around to pass the DSDT > into SeaBIOS via fw_cfg interface. Those patches never made it in > (I forget why), but the basic functionality seemed sound. Patching > the DSDT in SeaBIOS would seem to eliminate that possibility. > > None of these would be road-blocks. However, they make me want to > consider other approaches. So if we had the hotplug stuff in a separate ssdt, and patched that in the same way my patches do, this seems to address 3 comments otu of 4 (all except the second one). We'll want to do something else for a bridge, but for now this seems a sane compromise? -- MST -- 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
