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
