On 13/2/24 19:57, Bernhard Beschow wrote:
Am 13. Februar 2024 12:01:49 UTC schrieb "Philippe Mathieu-Daudé"
<phi...@linaro.org>:
Since pc_madt_cpu_entry() is only used by:
- hw/i386/acpi-build.c // single call
- hw/i386/acpi-common.c // definition
there is no need to expose it outside of hw/i386/.
Declare it in "acpi-common.h".
acpi-build.c doesn't need "hw/i386/pc.h" anymore.
Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@linaro.org>
---
hw/i386/acpi-common.h | 3 +++
include/hw/i386/pc.h | 4 ----
hw/i386/acpi-common.c | 1 -
3 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/i386/acpi-common.h b/hw/i386/acpi-common.h
index b3c56ee014..e305aaac15 100644
--- a/hw/i386/acpi-common.h
+++ b/hw/i386/acpi-common.h
@@ -1,12 +1,15 @@
#ifndef HW_I386_ACPI_COMMON_H
#define HW_I386_ACPI_COMMON_H
+#include "hw/boards.h"
#include "hw/acpi/bios-linker-loader.h"
#include "hw/i386/x86.h"
/* Default IOAPIC ID */
#define ACPI_BUILD_IOAPIC_ID 0x0
+void pc_madt_cpu_entry(int uid, const CPUArchIdList *apic_ids,
Since the function is apparently not pc but rather x86-specific: Does it make
sense to rename the function as well, e.g. to x86_madt_cpu_entry()?
I don't know much about ACPI tables. Is it?
Ani, can you confirm and do you mind posting a cleanup patch on top? :)
Regards,
Phil.
