On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 08:17:56AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > On 12/2/22 04:24, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > > On the implementation side, is the proposed approach acceptable? > > Mostly asking because it adds Xen conditionals to otherwise generic > > ACPI code. > > That's a good Rafael question. > > But, how do other places in the ACPI code handle things like this? Hm, I don't know of other places in the Xen case, the only resource in ACPI AML tables managed by Xen are Processor objects/devices AFAIK. The rest of devices are fully managed by the dom0 guest. I think such special handling is very specific to Xen, but maybe I'm wrong and there are similar existing cases in ACPI code already. We could add some kind of hook (iow: a function pointer in some struct that could be filled on a implementation basis?) but I didn't want overengineering this if adding a conditional was deemed OK. Thanks, Roger.
