new pmtools available for testing

new pmtools available for testing

[Alexey Starikovskiy]

Hi,

acpixtract perl-script is being replaced by C xtract utility. Please test.
Advances are:
    - Perl not required :)
    - no 64k output limit of perl-script
    - --list option shows all tables in the file
    - unified interface with acpidump
    - faster(?)

Thanks in advance,
    Alex.

Re: new pmtools available for testing

[Alexey Starikovskiy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 560 bytes --]

Here they are...
Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> Hi,
>
> acpixtract perl-script is being replaced by C xtract utility. Please 
> test.
> Advances are:
>    - Perl not required :)
>    - no 64k output limit of perl-script
>    - --list option shows all tables in the file
>    - unified interface with acpidump
>    - faster(?)
>
> Thanks in advance,
>    Alex.
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[-- Attachment #2: pmtools-20061121.tar.gz --]
[-- Type: application/gzip, Size: 48269 bytes --]

Re: new pmtools available for testing

[Thomas Renninger]

On Tue, 2006-11-21 at 21:24 +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> acpixtract perl-script is being replaced by C xtract utility. Please test.
> Advances are:
>     - Perl not required :)
>     - no 64k output limit of perl-script
>     - --list option shows all tables in the file
>     - unified interface with acpidump
>     - faster(?)
> 
> Thanks in advance,
Is this acpixtract that already existed in ACPICA since some time and
now moved to pmtools?

If yes, I can say that it's working stable (at least older ACPICA vers)
and makes live easier.

Thanks,

   Thomas

Re: new pmtools available for testing

[Alexey Starikovskiy]

Thomas Renninger wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-11-21 at 21:24 +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
>   
>> Hi,
>>
>> acpixtract perl-script is being replaced by C xtract utility. Please test.
>> Advances are:
>>     - Perl not required :)
>>     - no 64k output limit of perl-script
>>     - --list option shows all tables in the file
>>     - unified interface with acpidump
>>     - faster(?)
>>
>> Thanks in advance,
>>     
> Is this acpixtract that already existed in ACPICA since some time and
> now moved to pmtools?
>
>   
Nope, it's duplicated effort.
> If yes, I can say that it's working stable (at least older ACPICA vers)
> and makes live easier.
>
> Thanks,
>
>    Thomas
>
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>   

Re: new pmtools available for testing

[Thomas Renninger]

On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 17:36 +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > On Tue, 2006-11-21 at 21:24 +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> >   
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> acpixtract perl-script is being replaced by C xtract utility. Please test.
> >> Advances are:
> >>     - Perl not required :)
> >>     - no 64k output limit of perl-script
> >>     - --list option shows all tables in the file
> >>     - unified interface with acpidump
> >>     - faster(?)
> >>
> >> Thanks in advance,
> >>     
> > Is this acpixtract that already existed in ACPICA since some time and
> > now moved to pmtools?
> >   
> Nope, it's duplicated effort.

Hmm, you should talk to (I think acpixtract C prog came from) Bob?
Someone should decide which should be the final one everybody should
use...
If one distri or application starts to package and use the one, others
start to use the other, we might have compatibility problems in some
scripts in future.

The linuxfirmwarekit makes use of ACPICA's acpixtract AFAIK (hardcoded
by something like system("acpixtract acpidump");).
I also packaged this one into SUSE pmtools package (since SUSE 10.1?).
-> I'd prefer to stick to the ACPICA's acpixtract...

Thanks for any clarifications on this one,

   Thomas

Re: new pmtools available for testing

[Alexey Starikovskiy]

Thomas Renninger wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 17:36 +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
>   
>> Thomas Renninger wrote:
>>     
>>> On Tue, 2006-11-21 at 21:24 +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> acpixtract perl-script is being replaced by C xtract utility. Please test.
>>>> Advances are:
>>>>     - Perl not required :)
>>>>     - no 64k output limit of perl-script
>>>>     - --list option shows all tables in the file
>>>>     - unified interface with acpidump
>>>>     - faster(?)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> Is this acpixtract that already existed in ACPICA since some time and
>>> now moved to pmtools?
>>>   
>>>       
>> Nope, it's duplicated effort.
>>     
>
> Hmm, you should talk to (I think acpixtract C prog came from) Bob?
> Someone should decide which should be the final one everybody should
> use...
> If one distri or application starts to package and use the one, others
> start to use the other, we might have compatibility problems in some
> scripts in future.
>
>   
New utility is names 'xtract' so it does not clash with 'acpixtract' 
either perl-script or ACPICA utility.
If are used to acpixtract, no need to change your habits. If you somehow 
tired of crippled interface, you could try new utility.
> The linuxfirmwarekit makes use of ACPICA's acpixtract AFAIK (hardcoded
> by something like system("acpixtract acpidump");).
> I also packaged this one into SUSE pmtools package (since SUSE 10.1?).
> -> I'd prefer to stick to the ACPICA's acpixtract..
>   
no problem at all.

Regards,
    Alex

Re: new pmtools available for testing

[Mattia Dongili]

On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 09:24:25PM +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> acpixtract perl-script is being replaced by C xtract utility. Please test.

Hello, I'm considering an update to the acpidump Debian package, so is
this version (20061121) available online somewhere?
Should it just appear in Len's kernel.org FTP when it's ready?

Thanks
-- 
mattia
:wq!

Re: new pmtools available for testing

[Alexey Starikovskiy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 505 bytes --]

Mattia Dongili wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 09:24:25PM +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
>   
>> Hi,
>>
>> acpixtract perl-script is being replaced by C xtract utility. Please test.
>>     
>
> Hello, I'm considering an update to the acpidump Debian package, so is
> this version (20061121) available online somewhere?
> Should it just appear in Len's kernel.org FTP when it's ready?
>
> Thanks
>   
Len is about to put 20061130 version out, with acpixtract from ACPI CA 
package.

Regards,
    Alex.

[-- Attachment #2: pmtools-20061130.tar.gz --]
[-- Type: application/gzip, Size: 53155 bytes --]

Re: new pmtools available for testing

[Len Brown]

Bob,
Any chance you could tweak the C acpixtract so it can handle
the parameter format of the old perl script?

I like the newer way better, but it looks like  backwards compatibility
is within our grasp without mucking it up, so I think we should do it.

On Sunday 10 December 2006 12:11, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> Mattia Dongili wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 09:24:25PM +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> >   
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> acpixtract perl-script is being replaced by C xtract utility. Please test.
> >>     
> >
> > Hello, I'm considering an update to the acpidump Debian package, so is
> > this version (20061121) available online somewhere?
> > Should it just appear in Len's kernel.org FTP when it's ready?
> >
> > Thanks
> >   
> Len is about to put 20061130 version out, with acpixtract from ACPI CA 
> package.

Well, I pushed this up to the ftp site, and it is functional, but the problem
is that the new acpixtract from ACPICA has different parameters, so it
isn't backwards compatible with the old per acpixtract.

the examples in pmtools/README include invocations like this:
    $ cat email | ./acpixtract DSDT > DSDT
    $ cat email | ./acpixtract FACP | ./acpitbl
    $ ./acpixtract FACP acpidump.out > FACP.bin
    $ ./acpixtract -n 3 SSDT acpidump.out > SSDT3.bin

but the new acpixtract looks like this:

# ./acpixtract FACP acpidump.out > FACP.bin
# cat FACP.bin
Could not open FACP
#
# ./acpixtract -n 3 SSDT acpidump.out > SSDT3.bin
# cat SSDT3.bin
Usage: acpixtract [option] <InputFile>

Extract binary ACPI tables from text acpidump output
Default invocation extracts all DSDTs and SSDTs
Version 20060324

Options:
 -a                    Extract all tables, not just DSDT/SSDT
 -l                    List table summaries, do not extract
 -s<Signature>         Extract all tables named <Signature>

RE: new pmtools available for testing

[Moore, Robert]

I don't know what's going on here.

I wrote acpixtract in C in order to get away from Perl and Perl issues.

I certainly hope that we don't have yet another version of acpixtract. I
don't mind changing things such as the interface, if everyone agrees
it's for the better. But it seems like an incredible waste of energy to
keep rewriting these kinds of utilities.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexey Starikovskiy
[mailto:alexey.y.starikovskiy@linux.intel.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2006 8:41 AM
> To: trenn@suse.de
> Cc: Brown, Len; linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org; Moore, Robert
> Subject: Re: new pmtools available for testing
> 
> Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 17:36 +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> >
> >> Thomas Renninger wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Tue, 2006-11-21 at 21:24 +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> acpixtract perl-script is being replaced by C xtract utility.
Please
> test.
> >>>> Advances are:
> >>>>     - Perl not required :)
> >>>>     - no 64k output limit of perl-script
> >>>>     - --list option shows all tables in the file
> >>>>     - unified interface with acpidump
> >>>>     - faster(?)
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks in advance,
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> Is this acpixtract that already existed in ACPICA since some time
and
> >>> now moved to pmtools?
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Nope, it's duplicated effort.
> >>
> >
> > Hmm, you should talk to (I think acpixtract C prog came from) Bob?
> > Someone should decide which should be the final one everybody should
> > use...
> > If one distri or application starts to package and use the one,
others
> > start to use the other, we might have compatibility problems in some
> > scripts in future.
> >
> >
> New utility is names 'xtract' so it does not clash with 'acpixtract'
> either perl-script or ACPICA utility.
> If are used to acpixtract, no need to change your habits. If you
somehow
> tired of crippled interface, you could try new utility.
> > The linuxfirmwarekit makes use of ACPICA's acpixtract AFAIK
(hardcoded
> > by something like system("acpixtract acpidump");).
> > I also packaged this one into SUSE pmtools package (since SUSE
10.1?).
> > -> I'd prefer to stick to the ACPICA's acpixtract..
> >
> no problem at all.
> 
> Regards,
>     Alex

RE: new pmtools available for testing

[Thomas Renninger]

On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 10:13 -0800, Moore, Robert wrote:
> I don't know what's going on here.
> 
> I wrote acpixtract in C in order to get away from Perl and Perl issues.
> 
> I certainly hope that we don't have yet another version of acpixtract.
Second.
Better remove this one soon. People are packing Len's pmtools. As soon
as it's spread confusion and maintenance work will grow.

   Thomas

Re: new pmtools available for testing

[Alexey Starikovskiy]

Thomas Renninger wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 10:13 -0800, Moore, Robert wrote:
>   
>> I don't know what's going on here.
>>
>> I wrote acpixtract in C in order to get away from Perl and Perl issues.
>>
>> I certainly hope that we don't have yet another version of acpixtract.
>>     
> Second.
> Better remove this one soon. People are packing Len's pmtools. As soon
> as it's spread confusion and maintenance work will grow.
>   
There was no confusion between two utilities with the same name, and now you claim to have lost between two with different names, how so?

pmtools used to be complete in sense it was able to decode that was it 
has produced, and it will remain complete.

Thanks,
    Alex.

Re: new pmtools available for testing

[Thomas Renninger]

On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 13:24 +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> Thomas Renninger wrote:
> > On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 10:13 -0800, Moore, Robert wrote:
> >   
> >> I don't know what's going on here.
> >>
> >> I wrote acpixtract in C in order to get away from Perl and Perl issues.
> >>
> >> I certainly hope that we don't have yet another version of acpixtract.
> >>     
> > Second.
> > Better remove this one soon. People are packing Len's pmtools. As soon
> > as it's spread confusion and maintenance work will grow.
> >   
> There was no confusion between two utilities with the same name, and now you claim to have lost between two with different names, how so?
It's not the two names, it simply makes no sense to provide two
utilities which do the same.

Why do you want to do that?

You have other params, other output, double amount of bug fixing or
feature enhancements work. I only see cons not one single pro argument
to do so.

> pmtools used to be complete in sense it was able to decode that was it 
> has produced, and it will remain complete.
But why not just move/copy Robert's acpixtract, it's already well
tested?
It does not include any APCICA stuff and changing the license shouldn't
be a problem for you...

   Thomas

Re: new pmtools available for testing

[Alexey Starikovskiy]

Thomas Renninger wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-11-28 at 13:24 +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
>   
>> Thomas Renninger wrote:
>>     
>>> On Mon, 2006-11-27 at 10:13 -0800, Moore, Robert wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> I don't know what's going on here.
>>>>
>>>> I wrote acpixtract in C in order to get away from Perl and Perl issues.
>>>>
>>>> I certainly hope that we don't have yet another version of acpixtract.
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> Second.
>>> Better remove this one soon. People are packing Len's pmtools. As soon
>>> as it's spread confusion and maintenance work will grow.
>>>   
>>>       
>> There was no confusion between two utilities with the same name, and now you claim to have lost between two with different names, how so?
>>     
> It's not the two names, it simply makes no sense to provide two
> utilities which do the same.
>   
So blaim Bob for making second utility and distributing it in ACPICA.

> Why do you want to do that?
>
> You have other params, other output, double amount of bug fixing or
> feature enhancements work. I only see cons not one single pro argument
> to do so.
>
>   
Params are compatible with acpidump. What do you mean by "other output"?
>> pmtools used to be complete in sense it was able to decode that was it 
>> has produced, and it will remain complete.
>>     
> But why not just move/copy Robert's acpixtract, it's already well
> tested?
> It does not include any APCICA stuff and changing the license shouldn't
> be a problem for you...
>
>   
Writing new utility from scratch took half a day, while porting ACPICA 
acpidump with change in license would take weeks.
It does include ACPICA types, so it will require ACPICA headers at least.
Also it relies on ACPICA subset of libc, so it will be pain to both 
maintain it  and  make any improvements.
We already tried to have acpidump utility in both ACPICA and pmtools and 
ended with two completely different programs.

Regards,
    Alex.

Re: new pmtools available for testing

[Bruno Ducrot]

On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 05:00:45PM +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> Writing new utility from scratch took half a day, while porting ACPICA 
> acpidump with change in license would take weeks.
> It does include ACPICA types, so it will require ACPICA headers at least.
> Also it relies on ACPICA subset of libc, so it will be pain to both 
> maintain it  and  make any improvements.
> We already tried to have acpidump utility in both ACPICA and pmtools and 
> ended with two completely different programs.
> 

I don't get it.

ducrot@neptune:~/packages$ cp -r acpica-unix-20060912/tools/acpixtract/ .
ducrot@neptune:~/packages$ cd acpixtract/
ducrot@neptune:~/packages/acpixtract$ make
cc -Wall -O2 -D_LINUX -DACPI_APPLICATION -Wstrict-prototypes -I../../include    -c -o acpixtract.o acpixtract.c
cc  acpixtract.o -o acpixtract
ducrot@neptune:~/packages/acpixtract$ 

How acpixtract need ACPICA specific headers?

-- 
Bruno Ducrot

--  Which is worse:  ignorance or apathy?
--  Don't know.  Don't care.

RE: new pmtools available for testing

[Moore, Robert]

I can take a look at it early next year.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-acpi-
> owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Len Brown
> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2006 10:20 AM
> To: Alexey Starikovskiy; Moore, Robert
> Cc: Mattia Dongili; linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: new pmtools available for testing
> 
> Bob,
> Any chance you could tweak the C acpixtract so it can handle
> the parameter format of the old perl script?
> 
> I like the newer way better, but it looks like  backwards
compatibility
> is within our grasp without mucking it up, so I think we should do it.
> 
> On Sunday 10 December 2006 12:11, Alexey Starikovskiy wrote:
> > Mattia Dongili wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2006 at 09:24:25PM +0300, Alexey Starikovskiy
wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> acpixtract perl-script is being replaced by C xtract utility.
Please
> test.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Hello, I'm considering an update to the acpidump Debian package,
so is
> > > this version (20061121) available online somewhere?
> > > Should it just appear in Len's kernel.org FTP when it's ready?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > Len is about to put 20061130 version out, with acpixtract from ACPI
CA
> > package.
> 
> Well, I pushed this up to the ftp site, and it is functional, but the
> problem
> is that the new acpixtract from ACPICA has different parameters, so it
> isn't backwards compatible with the old per acpixtract.
> 
> the examples in pmtools/README include invocations like this:
>     $ cat email | ./acpixtract DSDT > DSDT
>     $ cat email | ./acpixtract FACP | ./acpitbl
>     $ ./acpixtract FACP acpidump.out > FACP.bin
>     $ ./acpixtract -n 3 SSDT acpidump.out > SSDT3.bin
> 
> but the new acpixtract looks like this:
> 
> # ./acpixtract FACP acpidump.out > FACP.bin
> # cat FACP.bin
> Could not open FACP
> #
> # ./acpixtract -n 3 SSDT acpidump.out > SSDT3.bin
> # cat SSDT3.bin
> Usage: acpixtract [option] <InputFile>
> 
> Extract binary ACPI tables from text acpidump output
> Default invocation extracts all DSDTs and SSDTs
> Version 20060324
> 
> Options:
>  -a                    Extract all tables, not just DSDT/SSDT
>  -l                    List table summaries, do not extract
>  -s<Signature>         Extract all tables named <Signature>
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi"
in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html