Avi Kivity wrote:
> Glauber Costa wrote:
>> mark processors as present through the _STA method
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Glauber Costa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> ---
>> bios/acpi-dsdt.dsl | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/bios/acpi-dsdt.dsl b/bios/acpi-dsdt.dsl
>> index e900795..cd42e23 100755
>> --- a/bios/acpi-dsdt.dsl
>> +++ b/bios/acpi-dsdt.dsl
>> @@ -25,9 +25,28 @@ DefinitionBlock (
>> 0x1 // OEM Revision
>> )
>> {
>> + Scope (\_PR)
>> + {
>> + Processor (CPU0, 0x00, 0x0000b010, 0x06) {Method (_STA) {
>> Return(0x1)}}
>> + Processor (CPU1, 0x01, 0x0000b010, 0x06) {Method (_STA) {
>> Return(0x1)}}
>> + Processor (CPU2, 0x02, 0x0000b010, 0x06) {Method (_STA) {
>> Return(0x1)}}
>> + Processor (CPU3, 0x03, 0x0000b010, 0x06) {Method (_STA) {
>> Return(0x1)}}
>> + Processor (CPU4, 0x04, 0x0000b010, 0x06) {Method (_STA) {
>> Return(0x1)}}
>> + Processor (CPU5, 0x05, 0x0000b010, 0x06) {Method (_STA) {
>> Return(0x1)}}
>> + Processor (CPU6, 0x06, 0x0000b010, 0x06) {Method (_STA) {
>> Return(0x1)}}
>> + Processor (CPU7, 0x07, 0x0000b010, 0x06) {Method (_STA) {
>> Return(0x1)}}
>> + Processor (CPU8, 0x08, 0x0000b010, 0x06) {Method (_STA) {
>> Return(0x1)}}
>> + Processor (CPU9, 0x09, 0x0000b010, 0x06) {Method (_STA) {
>> Return(0x1)}}
>> + Processor (CPUA, 0x0a, 0x0000b010, 0x06) {Method (_STA) {
>> Return(0x1)}}
>> + Processor (CPUB, 0x0b, 0x0000b010, 0x06) {Method (_STA) {
>> Return(0x1)}}
>> + Processor (CPUC, 0x0c, 0x0000b010, 0x06) {Method (_STA) {
>> Return(0x1)}}
>> + Processor (CPUD, 0x0d, 0x0000b010, 0x06) {Method (_STA) {
>> Return(0x1)}}
>> + Processor (CPUE, 0x0e, 0x0000b010, 0x06) {Method (_STA) {
>> Return(0x1)}}
>> + }
>>
>
> There is now code in rombios32.c to do this. It needs to be removed.
> See acpi_build_processor_ssdt().
Building the table by hand is trivial in the case where the processors
are just _listed_, and can be easily justified. This first patch just
add the _STA method, but other follows, which turns the processor block
into a quite complicated thing. Not to mention the operational region,
the notifications that have to refer to the processor objects, etc.
So I can't see any valid justification for using the code in
rombios32.c, instead of a high level language such as the one provided
by acpi.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
