On 02/18/16 21:16, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On 18 February 2016 at 21:14, Laszlo Ersek <ler...@redhat.com> wrote: >> On 02/18/16 21:03, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: >>> The ACPI spec predates the AARCH64 architecture by 5 versions, so there >>> is no point in supporting anything below v5.0. So set the PCD that >>> controls the ACPI table generation to the appropriate value. >>> >>> Note that the current consumers of this PCD only check whether bit 1 >>> is set or not (i.e., ACPI v1.0b), but this may change in the future, >>> so let's choose a meaningful value right away. >>> >>> Contributed-under: TianoCore Contribution Agreement 1.0 >>> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheu...@linaro.org> >>> --- >>> ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtQemu.dsc | 3 +++ >>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtQemu.dsc b/ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtQemu.dsc >>> index cece70dd97b9..d0e9a6f7ea33 100644 >>> --- a/ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtQemu.dsc >>> +++ b/ArmVirtPkg/ArmVirtQemu.dsc >>> @@ -174,6 +174,9 @@ [PcdsFixedAtBuild.common] >>> # arm64 or ARM Linux, and enabling it here is pointless. >>> gEfiMdeModulePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdPropertiesTableEnable|FALSE >>> >>> + # we only target OSes that support ACPI v5.0 or later >>> + gEfiMdeModulePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdAcpiExposedTableVersions|0x20 >>> + >>> [PcdsFixedAtBuild.AARCH64] >>> gEfiMdeModulePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdSetNxForStack|TRUE >>> >>> >> >> You mention AARCH64 in the commit message, but the PCD is set in the >> [PcdsFixedAtBuild.common] section, hence it will affect the ARM build >> too. Is that intentional? >> > > No, it is not intentional, but ACPI on ARM is non-existent in practice
I wasn't aware of this, so... > (and I am not even sure if the spec actually covers it). I can move it > if you like please move it for the sake of the uninitiated, like me. Thanks! Laszlo _______________________________________________ edk2-devel mailing list edk2-devel@lists.01.org https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel