On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 10:15:58 -0400 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 03:52:53PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Oct 2022 01:59:22 -0400 > > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > Just noticed this when disassembling: > > > > > > Parsing completed > > > ACPI Warning: NsLookup: Type mismatch on ODAT (RegionField), searching > > > for (Buffer) (20210604/nsaccess-760) > > > Disassembly completed > > > ASL Output: /tmp/old-asl2/tests/data/acpi/virt/SSDT.memhp.dsl - 14945 > > > bytes > > > > > > Did not look into this yet but it seems new. > > It was there practically 'forever'. > > > > ODAT should be treated as Buffer according to implicit Field/data > > conversion rules, > > that's probably the reason why it works. So warning looks a bit bogus to me. > > > > however: > > DefCreateByteField := CreateByteFieldOp SourceBuff ByteIndex NameString > > SourceBuff := TermArg => Buffer > > TermArg := ExpressionOpcode | DataObject | ArgObj | LocalObj > > > > and none of that explicitly leads to > > > > TermObj := Object | StatementOpcode | ExpressionOpcode > > Object := NameSpaceModifierObj | NamedObj > > > > So if we are to be as pedantic as IASL, we need to supply > > field to CreateByteField not by name but via one of TermArg. > > We could copy/assign whole buffer to a LocalObj > > or summarily use ExpressionOpcode => ToBuffer() // this one has a bit > > controversial definition in 6.4 spec > > or to avoid any copying add 'useless' DerefOf(RefOf()) > > wrapper around name to make argument of ExpressionOpcode kind. > > > > following should silence warning. > > > > diff --git a/hw/acpi/nvdimm.c b/hw/acpi/nvdimm.c > > index 31e46df0bd..7488007540 100644 > > --- a/hw/acpi/nvdimm.c > > +++ b/hw/acpi/nvdimm.c > > @@ -1127,7 +1127,7 @@ static void nvdimm_build_common_dsm(Aml *dev, > > /* If RLEN >= Integer size, just use CreateField() operator */ > > aml_append(method, aml_store(aml_shiftleft(dsm_out_buf_size, > > aml_int(3)), > > dsm_out_buf_size)); > > - aml_append(method, aml_create_field(aml_name(NVDIMM_DSM_OUT_BUF), > > + aml_append(method, > > aml_create_field(aml_derefof(aml_refof(aml_name(NVDIMM_DSM_OUT_BUF))), > > aml_int(0), dsm_out_buf_size, "OBUF")); > > aml_append(method, aml_return(aml_name("OBUF"))); > > > Thanks! Let's try to raise this with ACPI committee? Do you have a contact there or know how to rise the issue?