On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 04:40:06AM +0000, Yoshihiro Furudera (Fujitsu) wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 01:14:18AM +0000, Yoshihiro Furudera (Fujitsu) wrote: > > > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 07:22:55AM +0000, Yoshihiro Furudera (Fujitsu) > > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 01:58:26AM +0000, Yoshihiro Furudera wrote: ... > > > > Device (SMB0) > > > > { > > > > ... > > > > } > > > > > > Hmm... Why Device object is called SMB0, are you sure it's the correct one? > > > > > > We considered the string to be the most concise representation of > > > SMBus HC#0, given the general constraint that object names should > > > ideally be four characters or less. We understood that, unlike HID, > > > SMBus object names are vendor-specific. > > > > But this all about UART! How is it related to SMBus? > > We created the SMB0 object according to the following specifications: > > ACPI Specification > 13.2. Accessing the SMBus from ASL Code > https://uefi.org/htmlspecs/ACPI_Spec_6_4_html/13_ACPI_System_Mgmt_Bus_Interface_Spec/accessing-the-smbus-from-asl-code.html > > IPMI Specification > Example 4: SSIF Interface(P574) > https://www.intel.co.jp/content/www/jp/ja/products/docs/servers/ipmi/ipmi-second-gen-interface-spec-v2-rev1-1.html > > Therefore, SMB0 does not deviate from the SMBus related specifications. Ah, I see now, sorry I missed that. Thank you for your patience and elaboration. Please, update the commit message as discussed, send a new version and I review it. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko