On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 02:32:45PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On Fri, 23 Jan 2015 10:59:48 +0200 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 02:49:50PM +0000, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com> > > > --- > > > hw/acpi/acpi-build-utils.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > include/hw/acpi/acpi-build-utils.h | 3 +++ > > > 2 files changed, 27 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/hw/acpi/acpi-build-utils.c b/hw/acpi/acpi-build-utils.c > > > index 40a1769..1bda2ec 100644 > > > --- a/hw/acpi/acpi-build-utils.c > > > +++ b/hw/acpi/acpi-build-utils.c > > > @@ -314,6 +314,30 @@ static AcpiAml aml_allocate_internal(uint8_t op, > > > AcpiBlockFlags flags) > > > return var; > > > } > > > > > > +/* > > > + * help to construct NameString, which return AcpiAml object > > > + * for using with other aml_append or other acpi_* terms > > > > Here and elsewhere: I can't parse this header text. > > I'm guessing you just mean "construct NameString", > > and that's it? > yes > > > > > Also, most other places use build_append_namestring - > > so when should acpi_name be used instead? > > This should be made clear here in the comment. > acpi_name() is a replacement/wrapper around build_append_namestring() > which returns AcpiAml object. build_append_namestring() is a nonpublic > lowlevel helper that deals with GArray, > while acpi_name() follows semantic of AML API. > > > > > > + */ > > > +AcpiAml GCC_FMT_ATTR(1, 2) acpi_name(const char *name_format, ...) > > > +{ > > > > This isn't really a name. It just appends a string. So rename this > > acpi_string and then the below one adding a name can be named acpi_name? > acpi_string is introduced in 27/47, which is a prefixed string > as described in spec. > > > Also, in many places one must use only one nameseg. > Where is it exactly? > Perhaps we could build in acpi_name() a check if we know in > what context enforce it. Better to have single/uniform API > for names than a several which is confusing.
I agree here. > > I think a separate api that actually validates > > that it's one segment is better than silently failing. > > Do we ever use it for more than 1 segment? > Yes we use names with more than one segment. Interesting. where exactly? > > If not, maybe the right thing to do is > > to use build_append_nameseg and call this one acpi_nameseg. > acpi_name() is used only for passing name as arguments to methods, > in spec there isn't a limitation to only one segment when it comes > to names, in ASL part of it. namesegment however only AML construct > which helps to build name, I prefer not expose lowlevel AML > unless we have to. OK, I agree. > > > > > > > + va_list ap; > > > + AcpiAml var = aml_allocate_internal(0, NON_BLOCK); > > > > 0 hard coded? What does it mean? > 1st arg for NON_BLOCK context doesn't mean anything/ignored. > alternatively I can make aml_allocate_nonblock() wrapper > around generic allocator. 0 isn't a valid opcode either, it can really be anything. > > Same elsewhere. > > > > > + va_start(ap, name_format); > > > + build_append_namestringv(var.buf, name_format, ap); > > > + va_end(ap); > > > + return var; > > > + > > > +/* ACPI 5.0: 20.2.5.1 Namespace Modifier Objects Encoding: DefName */ > > > > Let's quote the earliest spec which documents each object: > > one year from now 5.0 will not be the latest. > > Applies here and elsewhere. > > In most places this will be 1.0b. > > Where the construct is newer, this will automatically > > document which guests support it. > I'll try to do it. > > > > > > +AcpiAml acpi_name_decl(const char *name, AcpiAml val) > > > +{ > > > + AcpiAml var = aml_allocate_internal(0, NON_BLOCK); > > > + build_append_byte(var.buf, 0x08); > > > > Pls add comment documenting what 0x08 is here. > sure > > > > > > + build_append_namestring(var.buf, "%s", name); > > > + aml_append(&var, val); > > > + return var; > > > +} > > > + > > > /* ACPI 5.0: 20.2.5.3 Type 1 Opcodes Encoding: DefIfElse */ > > > AcpiAml acpi_if(AcpiAml predicate) > > > { > > > diff --git a/include/hw/acpi/acpi-build-utils.h > > > b/include/hw/acpi/acpi-build-utils.h > > > index 177f9ed..868cfa5 100644 > > > --- a/include/hw/acpi/acpi-build-utils.h > > > +++ b/include/hw/acpi/acpi-build-utils.h > > > @@ -21,6 +21,9 @@ typedef struct AcpiAml { > > > > > > void aml_append(AcpiAml *parent_ctx, AcpiAml child); > > > > > > +/* non block ASL object primitives */ > > > > what does it mean that it's a "non block primitive"? > > I didn't find this concept in the spec. > As for a question what is NON_BLOCK, it's for simple inline ASL > construct that doesn't have to be packaged in special way > examles: > Store(A,B) > Name(FOO, VAL) > IO(...) > while there are different block elements differing in how > they are created see 1/47 aml_append(): > > ResourceTemplate { > /* block of other ASL items */ > } > > Package() { > /* block of other ASL items */ > } > > if ... else ... > > Scope() { > /* block of other ASL items */ > } > > and so on. "special way" is kind of vague. Maybe add a comment explaining when it's used. Is it when length isn't used as a prefix? AML_NO_PREFIX? > > > > > +AcpiAml GCC_FMT_ATTR(1, 2) acpi_name(const char *name_format, ...); > > > +AcpiAml acpi_name_decl(const char *name, AcpiAml val); > > > /* Block ASL object primitives */ > > > AcpiAml acpi_if(AcpiAml predicate); > > > AcpiAml acpi_method(const char *name, int arg_count); > > > -- > > > 1.8.3.1