On Thu, 22 Oct 2015 22:03:24 +0200 Matthias Lange <matthias.la...@kernkonzept.com> wrote:
> This patch appends "ACPI0007" as the HID to each processor object. > > Until commit 20843d processor objects used to have a _HID. According > to the ACPI spec this is not required but removing it breaks systems Pls answer Michael's question about motivation of this patch. i.e. what guests it exactly breaks? > which relied on the HID. As it does no harm it is safe to add _HID > to processor objects and restore the old behaviour. > > Signed-off-by: Matthias Lange <matthias.la...@kernkonzept.com> > --- > hw/i386/acpi-build.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/hw/i386/acpi-build.c b/hw/i386/acpi-build.c > index 95e0c65..314cd0b 100644 > --- a/hw/i386/acpi-build.c > +++ b/hw/i386/acpi-build.c > @@ -1153,6 +1153,9 @@ build_ssdt(GArray *table_data, GArray *linker, > for (i = 0; i < acpi_cpus; i++) { > dev = aml_processor(i, 0, 0, "CP%.02X", i); > > + /* for processor objects a _HID is not strictly required, > however it > + * does no harm and preserves compatibility with other BIOSes */ > + aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_HID", aml_string("ACPI0007"))); Spec doesn't tell anything about using ACPI0007 with Processor statement, it's only mentioned in context of Device statement. > method = aml_method("_MAT", 0); > aml_append(method, aml_return(aml_call1("CPMA", aml_int(i)))); > aml_append(dev, method);