At 11/03/2011 08:30 AM, Kevin O'Connor Write: > On Wed, Nov 02, 2011 at 10:54:42AM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 01, 2011 at 06:59:01PM -0400, Kevin O'Connor wrote: >>> Can we leave these parts in the DSDT and only move the bulk generated >>> stuff to the SSDT? >>> >> They can, but I thought one of the reasons we do the split >> is to make it possible for users to supply their own DSDT? >> If so creating calls from SSDT into DSDT would make this very fragile. > > I think it's reasonable to require that a user supplied DSDT still > fill certain requirements. Keep in mind that the reason for the "user > supplied" DSDT was for new platform (q35) development - not > necessarily so each individual user could set their own. I do not think it's reasonable to require that a user supplied DSDT still fill certain requiements. I think we should not use default SSDT if we use user supplied DSDT. If we use user supplied DSDT, we should use user supplied SSDT too. Thanks Wen Congyang > > It's not great to have the DSDT and SSDT tied to each other. However, > once RMV is removed, it's only two methods (PCNT supplied by the SSDT > and PCEJ supplied by the DSDT). > > I do see the upside to moving it all to the SSDT - but that has the > disadvantage of taking away the ability of a user supplied DSDT to > tweak how the hotplug functions work. Also, we'd then want to redo > CPU hotplug to be the same way. > > -Kevin > > _______________________________________________ > SeaBIOS mailing list > SeaBIOS@xxxxxxxxxxx > http://www.seabios.org/mailman/listinfo/seabios > -- 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
