On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 05:27:49PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 16:42:18 +0100
> Samuel Ortiz <sa...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Igor,
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 04:25:51PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > > On Mon, 26 Nov 2018 17:29:37 +0100
> > > Samuel Ortiz <sa...@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > That will allow us to generalize the ARM build_rsdp() routine to support
> > > > both legacy RSDP (The current i386 implementation) and extended RSDP
> > > > (The ARM implementation).
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Samuel Ortiz <sa...@linux.intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > include/hw/acpi/acpi-defs.h | 11 +++++++++++
> > > > hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > > > 2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/include/hw/acpi/acpi-defs.h b/include/hw/acpi/acpi-defs.h
> > > > index af8e023968..e7fd24c6c5 100644
> > > > --- a/include/hw/acpi/acpi-defs.h
> > > > +++ b/include/hw/acpi/acpi-defs.h
> > > > @@ -53,6 +53,17 @@ struct AcpiRsdpDescriptor { /* Root System
> > > > Descriptor Pointer */
> > > > } QEMU_PACKED;
> > > > typedef struct AcpiRsdpDescriptor AcpiRsdpDescriptor;
> > > >
> > > > +typedef struct AcpiRsdpData {
> > > > + uint8_t oem_id[6]; /* OEM identification */
> > > > + uint8_t revision; /* Must be 0 for 1.0, 2 for 2.0 */
> > > > +
> > > > + unsigned *rsdt_tbl_offset;
> > > > + unsigned *xsdt_tbl_offset;
> > > > +} AcpiRsdpData;
> > > > +
> > >
> > > > +#define ACPI_RSDP_REV_1 0
> > > > +#define ACPI_RSDP_REV_2 2
> > > it's one time used spec defined values so just use values directly
> > > in place with a comment, so reader won't have to jump around code
> > > when comparing to spec.
> > It's also used in the ACPI tests fix patch.
> it's better to use in test it's own version (we just opencode them there)
> see fadt_fetch_facs_and_dsdt_ptrs()/sanitize_fadt_ptrs()
> same applies for length.
> that way if we break it in qemu's code test would catch the thing
>
> > Also the 0 for revision 1 is a little confusing, I feel the above
> > definition is clearer.
> that's confusion is in the spec, so we just mimic it, no need to add more on
> top
To be more precise, there is a huge number of constants in ACPI
such that adding defines for them all would be a huge burden,
and will not make it easy to check values against the
spec at all (case in point ACPI_RSDP_REV_2 is actually wrong,
2 is version 3 and up).
Thus the preferred style is to add a comment near the value
matching spec name verbatim, so one can copy it and
look it up in the spec. Sometimes one needs to reference
specific spec version.
0 /* Revision: ACPI version 1.0 */
and
1 /* Revision: ACPI 2.0 */
and
2 /* Revision: ACPI 3.0a */
For style consistency, if the value is used multiple times, we avoid
duplication by using an inline function and not a macro.
> >
> >
> > > > +
> > > > /* Table structure from Linux kernel (the ACPI tables are under the
> > > > BSD license) */
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c b/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c
> > > > index 0835900052..2dad465ecf 100644
> > > > --- a/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c
> > > > +++ b/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c
> > > > @@ -368,7 +368,7 @@ static void acpi_dsdt_add_power_button(Aml *scope)
> > > >
> > > > /* RSDP */
> > > > static void
> > > > -build_rsdp(GArray *rsdp_table, BIOSLinker *linker, unsigned
> > > > xsdt_tbl_offset)
> > > > +build_rsdp(GArray *rsdp_table, BIOSLinker *linker, AcpiRsdpData
> > > > *rsdp_data)
> > > > {
> > > > AcpiRsdpDescriptor *rsdp = acpi_data_push(rsdp_table, sizeof
> > > > *rsdp);
> > > > unsigned xsdt_pa_size = sizeof(rsdp->xsdt_physical_address);
> > > > @@ -379,14 +379,14 @@ build_rsdp(GArray *rsdp_table, BIOSLinker
> > > > *linker, unsigned xsdt_tbl_offset)
> > > > true /* fseg memory */);
> > > >
> > > > memcpy(&rsdp->signature, "RSD PTR ", sizeof(rsdp->signature));
> > > > - memcpy(rsdp->oem_id, ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME6, sizeof(rsdp->oem_id));
> > > > + memcpy(rsdp->oem_id, rsdp_data->oem_id, sizeof(rsdp->oem_id));
> > > > rsdp->length = cpu_to_le32(sizeof(*rsdp));
> > > > - rsdp->revision = 0x02;
> > > > + rsdp->revision = rsdp_data->revision;
> > > >
> > > > /* Address to be filled by Guest linker */
> > > > bios_linker_loader_add_pointer(linker,
> > > > ACPI_BUILD_RSDP_FILE, xsdt_pa_offset, xsdt_pa_size,
> > > > - ACPI_BUILD_TABLE_FILE, xsdt_tbl_offset);
> > > > + ACPI_BUILD_TABLE_FILE, *rsdp_data->xsdt_tbl_offset);
> > > >
> > > > /* Checksum to be filled by Guest linker */
> > > > bios_linker_loader_add_checksum(linker, ACPI_BUILD_RSDP_FILE,
> > > > @@ -399,6 +399,20 @@ build_rsdp(GArray *rsdp_table, BIOSLinker *linker,
> > > > unsigned xsdt_tbl_offset)
> > > > (char *)&rsdp->extended_checksum - rsdp_table->data);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > +static void
> > > > +init_rsdp_data(AcpiRsdpData *data, const char *oem_id, uint8_t
> > > > revision,
> > > > + unsigned *rsdt_offset, unsigned *xsdt_offset)
> > > > +{
> > > > + /* Caller must provide an OEM ID */
> > > > + g_assert(oem_id);
> > > > + g_assert(strlen(oem_id) >= 6);
> > > > +
> > > > + memcpy(data->oem_id, oem_id, 6);
> > > > + data->revision = revision;
> > > > + data->rsdt_tbl_offset = rsdt_offset;
> > > > + data->xsdt_tbl_offset = xsdt_offset;
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > static void
> > > > build_iort(GArray *table_data, BIOSLinker *linker, VirtMachineState
> > > > *vms)
> > > > {
> > > > @@ -810,6 +824,7 @@ void virt_acpi_build(VirtMachineState *vms,
> > > > AcpiBuildTables *tables)
> > > > GArray *table_offsets;
> > > > unsigned dsdt, xsdt;
> > > > GArray *tables_blob = tables->table_data;
> > > > + AcpiRsdpData rsdp;
> > > s/rsdp/rsdp_info/
> > >
> > > >
> > > > table_offsets = g_array_new(false, true /* clear */,
> > > > sizeof(uint32_t));
> > > > @@ -857,7 +872,9 @@ void virt_acpi_build(VirtMachineState *vms,
> > > > AcpiBuildTables *tables)
> > > > build_xsdt(tables_blob, tables->linker, table_offsets, NULL, NULL);
> > > >
> > > > /* RSDP is in FSEG memory, so allocate it separately */
> > > > - build_rsdp(tables->rsdp, tables->linker, xsdt);
> > > > + init_rsdp_data(&rsdp, ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME6, ACPI_RSDP_REV_2,
> > > > + NULL, &xsdt);
> > > It would be more concise to use declarative style without extra clutter:
> > >
> > > - init_rsdp_data(&rsdp, ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME6, ACPI_RSDP_REV_2,
> > > - NULL, &xsdt);
> > > - build_rsdp(tables->rsdp, tables->linker, &rsdp);
> > > + {
> > > + AcpiRsdpData rsdp = {
> > > + .revision = 2,
> > > + .oem_id = ACPI_BUILD_APPNAME6,
> > > + .xsdt_tbl_offset = &xsdt,
> > > + .rsdt_tbl_offset = NULL,
> > > + };
> > > + build_rsdp(tables->rsdp, tables->linker, &rsdp);
> > > + }
> > 2 things here, imo:
> >
> > - This is not more concise.
> with function, one have to jump to it's definition/body to find out what
> each argument is, with declaration + initialization inplace it's clear
> what values mean as you see fields right there as well.
>
> If it's simple structure it is clearer to use initializer, instead of
> wrapper helper. With complex structure it could be other way around.
>
> > - It's code duplication as almost the same snippet is going to be used
> > for i386/acpi-build.c
> the same goes for init_rsdp_data(...), the only difference
> the declaration isn't folded in 2 lines to be more readable and there is
> boiler plate helper function adds.
>
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Samuel.
