Hi Ard, Mark,
On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 4:23 PM Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> DT support for SMBIOS can live in generic code, but the binding has to
> be sane. As I suggested before, it probably makes sense to supplant
> the entrypoint rather than just carry its address - this means a 'reg'
> property with base and size to describe the physical region, and at
> least major/minor/docrev fields to describe the version.
Regarding dts node binding, our current definition is as follows:
/dts
{
...
cfgtables {
acpi_phy_ptr = 0000000000000000; //u64
smbios_phy_ptr = 0000000000000000; //u64
...
}
...
}
x86 only gave a root_pointer entry address
u64 x86_default_get_root_pointer(void)
{
return boot_params.acpi_rsdp_addr;
}
Regarding the naming of the binding above, Mark, do you have any suggestions?
> For the ACPI side, you should just implement
> acpi_arch_get_root_pointer() under arch/riscv, and wire it up in
> whichever way you want. But please check with the RISC-V maintainers
> if they are up for this, and whether they want to see this mechanism
> contributed to one of the pertinent specifications.
You suggest putting SMBIOS in general code instead of ACPI, why?
>From the perspective of firmware information passing, they are a class.
SMBIOS and ACPI are not related to ARCH, nor is DTS to obtain firmware
information,
Why do you have to put part of the ACPI code under arch/risc-v/?
The scope of the previous discussion was limited to RISC-V because of
historical reasons such as the binding with EFI on ARM64. We will only
enable this function on RISC-V in subsequent patches.
The realization of the FFI scheme itself is irrelevant to the arch.
Thanks，
Yunhui
