> -----Original Message----- > From: linux-acpi-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-acpi- > owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rafael J. Wysocki > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2018 1:45 AM > To: Busch, Keith <keith.busch@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; ACPI Devel > Maling List <linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Linux Memory Management List > <linux-mm@xxxxxxxxx>; Greg Kroah-Hartman > <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx>; > Hansen, Dave <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxx>; Williams, Dan J > <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 01/12] acpi: Create subtable parsing infrastructure > > On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 2:05 AM Keith Busch <keith.busch@xxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > Hi Rafael and Bob, > > Parsing entries in an ACPI table had assumed a generic header > > structure that is most common. There is no standard ACPI header, > > though, so less common types would need custom parsers if they want go > > through their sub-table entry list. > > It looks like the problem at hand is that acpi_hmat_structure is incompatible > with acpi_subtable_header because of the different layout and field sizes. Just out of curiosity, why don't we use ACPICA code to parse static ACPI tables in Linux? We have a disassembler for static tables that parses all supported tables. This seems like a duplication of code/effort... Erik > > If so, please state that clearly here. > > With that, please feel free to add > > Reviewed-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> > > to this patch.
