On Thursday, November 17, 2011, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 4:27 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wednesday, November 16, 2011, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > >> We should try very hard to treat APEI generic address structures the > >> same way as all others. If that means some machines need firmware > >> upgrades or some sort of quirks to work around BIOS bugs, we might > >> have to accept that. I think a single set of GAS accessors plus a few > >> quirks that fix the GAS structures is far better than having > >> APEI-specific GAS accessors that are basically tailored to a few > >> broken machines. > > > > We can use APEI-specific wrappers around generic GAS accessors, though. > > Yes, but IMHO, we should only need wrappers to support APEI-specific > functionality, e.g., the mask. > > Here's an attempt to lay out how I think acpi_read() and acpi_write() > *should* work: > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjvKas55tQpqdElKVXM2TEFVcnI3SjVuZ1pqUENMN1E > > I think the proposed behavior is compatible with the APEI assumptions > in the current code. Please comment :) Well, I'd express access_width in multiples of 8. Or perhaps use a mask? I'm afraid it may be difficult to get right by the callers, however. Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
