From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by 2002:a5d:6089:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id w9csp1433267wrt; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 07:43:15 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/WOMFDvQeVo/nUeQrVEOSBv4nAY9cAfeh+VXk4MPAfT028Dn7C7lVvAzr5PVqu8saf5SgCr X-Received: by 2002:a81:1d44:: with SMTP id d65mr19850226ywd.483.1543333395310; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 07:43:15 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1543333395; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=jVtW/iW4pBlJeihmn62SJUTROPDvsgEsovzJDqcv1thGVslGGEPweF57WqoI2LXuI5 fvCyzBXww6VoRADxlgEYOwkRxWr02aT2eY1n4iQR2AkPtH7tynqr6D6Xa9rovHKLskv/ sU3aazu6rI6TeQiXsgmezm55Qm5A3xZkdLvpuzRU87eHsZ4b87su9JdV96IvGXxP1OXH bJlAI2XDcmvUiR9hOHElp9qtgaJSPq8jnRrengCQgDAhjXINKwS4Tzmla1HNCk6ji7HN C7a4/vjQE9DKUs5P5KzDQAiHqqpzF8uUhZSwUr5Rer0bBWN25VRrFPCvy0SYu4sxQ58F vZTA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=sender:errors-to:cc:list-subscribe:list-help:list-post:list-archive :list-unsubscribe:list-id:precedence:subject:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:to:from:date; bh=iFqAJ9+/pv0hAGls4hb0g/KG+ijwp+WufD1ujewtbRc=; b=ppyB86h19McIvrf2PoehxfWy0xNDmBSH2SP2Y9H5wncgmpg3mvVQM1BHCJUrD3vjux kD0QZS8kHiKxDP19Exa4C+avVgKAOAIba9VpASbrTQotqGw9n6DbNrEStsHxoow4vm/w blWMDI7c07+lS4LuAX105NZbEyWoK6ehor8AOdg5T+pb6z9iVBXCR/dutPqfcB17MJnS zuPjJ6a/p/knG0MMNjfiQpvRQfF5WsPWHHiIXCsjXv3e2BGk1we3JQSzbThnxUN7m7up u7rCYuoM6grODYY4jNuUdPX8rz4bMh/nIruQX4BNgXX+gQchlS/Yu35XW2WQpLQIfs02 L5aA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org designates 2001:4830:134:3::11 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org"; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Return-Path: Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org. [2001:4830:134:3::11]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id w126-v6si2977662yba.122.2018.11.27.07.43.15 for (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 27 Nov 2018 07:43:15 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org designates 2001:4830:134:3::11 as permitted sender) client-ip=2001:4830:134:3::11; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org designates 2001:4830:134:3::11 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org"; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Received: from localhost ([::1]:43039 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gRfW6-0006dK-PU for alex.bennee@linaro.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 10:43:14 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54480) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gRfVu-0006d0-Le for qemu-arm@nongnu.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 10:43:03 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gRfVn-00017o-JD for qemu-arm@nongnu.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 10:43:02 -0500 Received: from mga06.intel.com ([134.134.136.31]:41056) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gRfVn-00011n-At; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 10:42:55 -0500 X-Amp-Result: UNSCANNABLE X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 27 Nov 2018 07:42:53 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,287,1539673200"; d="scan'208";a="93731017" Received: from sdommett-mobl2.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO caravaggio) ([10.252.8.174]) by fmsmga008.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 27 Nov 2018 07:42:48 -0800 Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 16:42:18 +0100 From: Samuel Ortiz To: Igor Mammedov Message-ID: <20181127154218.GA5677@caravaggio> References: <20181126162942.21258-1-sameo@linux.intel.com> <20181126162942.21258-5-sameo@linux.intel.com> <20181127162551.29608eeb@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181127162551.29608eeb@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 134.134.136.31 Subject: Re: [Qemu-arm] [PATCH 4/8] hw: arm: Carry RSDP specific data through AcpiRsdpData X-BeenThere: qemu-arm@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Laurent Vivier , Peter Maydell , Thomas Huth , Eduardo Habkost , Ben Warren , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Shannon Zhao , qemu-arm@nongnu.org, Marcel Apfelbaum , Paolo Bonzini , Richard Henderson Errors-To: qemu-arm-bounces+alex.bennee=linaro.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-arm" X-TUID: 77liNWFvHF1t 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 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 > > --- > > 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. Also the 0 for revision 1 is a little confusing, I feel the above definition is clearer. > > + > > /* 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. - It's code duplication as almost the same snippet is going to be used for i386/acpi-build.c Cheers, Samuel. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54500) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gRfVw-0006d6-PG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 10:43:05 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gRfVv-0001To-PG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 10:43:04 -0500 Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 16:42:18 +0100 From: Samuel Ortiz Message-ID: <20181127154218.GA5677@caravaggio> References: <20181126162942.21258-1-sameo@linux.intel.com> <20181126162942.21258-5-sameo@linux.intel.com> <20181127162551.29608eeb@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181127162551.29608eeb@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/8] hw: arm: Carry RSDP specific data through AcpiRsdpData List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Igor Mammedov Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Peter Maydell , qemu-arm@nongnu.org, Shannon Zhao , Laurent Vivier , Richard Henderson , Paolo Bonzini , Ben Warren , Thomas Huth , Marcel Apfelbaum , Eduardo Habkost , "Michael S. Tsirkin" 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 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 > > --- > > 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. Also the 0 for revision 1 is a little confusing, I feel the above definition is clearer. > > + > > /* 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. - It's code duplication as almost the same snippet is going to be used for i386/acpi-build.c Cheers, Samuel.