> -----Original Message----- > From: Rafael J. Wysocki [mailto:rafael@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2018 12:57 AM > To: Schmauss, Erik <erik.schmauss@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Williams, Dan J <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx>; Rafael J. Wysocki > <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx>; Busch, Keith <keith.busch@xxxxxxxxx>; Moore, > Robert <robert.moore@xxxxxxxxx>; 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>; Hansen, Dave > <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 01/12] acpi: Create subtable parsing > infrastructure > > On Thu, Dec 20, 2018 at 2:15 AM Schmauss, Erik > <erik.schmauss@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: linux-acpi-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-acpi- > > > owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dan Williams > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2018 4:00 PM > > > To: Schmauss, Erik <erik.schmauss@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx>; Busch, Keith > > > <keith.busch@xxxxxxxxx>; Moore, Robert > <robert.moore@xxxxxxxxx>; > > > 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>; Hansen, Dave > <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 01/12] acpi: Create subtable parsing > > > infrastructure > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 19, 2018 at 3:19 PM Schmauss, Erik > > > <erik.schmauss@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----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... > > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > > Oh, I thought acpi_table_parse_entries() was the common code. > > > What's the ACPICA duplicate? > > > > I was thinking AcpiDmDumpTable(). After looking at this ACPICA > code, I > > realized that the this ACPICA doesn't actually build a parse tree or > data structure. > > It loops over the data structure to format the input ACPI table to a > file. > > > > To me, it seems like a good idea for Linux and ACPICA to share the > > same code when parsing and analyzing these structures. I know that > > Linux may emit warnings that are specific to Linux but there are > > structural analyses that should be the same (such as checking lengths > of tables and subtables so that we don't have out of bounds access). > > I agree. > > I guess the reason why it has not been done this way was because > nobody thought about it. :-) > > So a project to consolidate these things might be a good one. Ok, I'll talk to Bob about it and see what we can do
