From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCCD982D94 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 06:05:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722405950; cv=none; b=TjrMLRvEXdy+NBf+ZxbJV4XbWdWHKaGYOtdOE6oNh+vLXmD6WJrmHf/LeeEsayNB0LR83gjz33OgJr3F3vPSrGg+EO/G+xhT5yk7mnRMUyHynH7bng/DBeQgHpSVB7IUU+Lwogo6gqkJiqudQlDqJ+r8jmrK8BoVhOqWXASfZWc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722405950; c=relaxed/simple; bh=K4cH+7VCD6e3VyLaYkP+2c/JqPrRcmLYWXVHy/HV82U=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=fdBu3OougOLS1KYeuTwJG+zYbBuK6A1L6IakcL6r2TWHBo+u5fwOuH1HmJjCgyuEbz33mtpx/eKeWXqzfyqKlfpV0tBQIgTZauzw+Jd3VftqyNNpgrZz+wkAqedJVKqcQ8jmRVTy+n1n/znAvThaASWBhpDWK/EwuZWaLjyEZLA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=H4afLWhJ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="H4afLWhJ" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 59BF0C116B1; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 06:05:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1722405950; bh=K4cH+7VCD6e3VyLaYkP+2c/JqPrRcmLYWXVHy/HV82U=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=H4afLWhJS8R/dW6CabjXEeTVbKhhnxODQ7ygwxzyJzgnactWW7rkADN5YaX+/wtmY OoPJA8wapzWBgt7Oy3e/9yYxCaWhfwsgGOH2/WYR0pib6wrl2TIMMpuMij0ABMos7I r2ObwHJBQuSLTgA6MV+IuNyGY0j3frV2rYkmfIYMLKx2sR1ulIf/05b3Wiye1zZodO BE8eLipiHYRiJZxlHhqQpiOkTKukTs84ucYBmKmmgwQeHKyQIQ7UwMVO5ARg4g6lfr MYeytj/eRqToLRc0ikHlQR05k1KLYK6v5vRdHXmHZcizsIDKm+DOMQzyAuKzBKL10E VQXDVNUktaQjw== Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 08:05:45 +0200 From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Cc: Igor Mammedov , Jonathan Cameron , Shiju Jose , Ani Sinha , Dongjiu Geng , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, qemu-arm@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] acpi/ghes: update comments to point to newer ACPI specs Message-ID: <20240731080545.7c0dbed7@foz.lan> In-Reply-To: <20240730073447-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <66c1ab4988589be99ae925c6361548f55fea58b0.1721630625.git.mchehab+huawei@kernel.org> <20240730132430.44d9e4ae@imammedo.users.ipa.redhat.com> <20240730073447-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.0 (GTK 3.24.43; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Em Tue, 30 Jul 2024 07:36:32 -0400 "Michael S. Tsirkin" escreveu: > On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 01:24:30PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > On Mon, 22 Jul 2024 08:45:58 +0200 > > Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote: > > > > > There is one reference to ACPI 4.0 and several references > > > to ACPI 6.x versions. > > > > > > Update them to point to ACPI 6.5 whenever possible. > > > > when it comes to APCI doc comments, they should point to > > the 1st (earliest) revision that provides given feature/value/field/table. > > Yes. And the motivation is twofold. > First, guests are built against > old acpi versions. knowing in which version things appeared > helps us know which guests support a feature. Good point, but IMO, a comment like "since: ACPI 4.0" would be better, as the comment may not reflect the first version supporting such features, but, instead, when someone added support to a particular feature set. > Second, acpi guys keep churning out new versions. > It makes no sense to try and update to latest one, > it will soon get out of date again. True, but having it updated helps people adding new code to get things right. Anyway, I got your point, I'll drop this patch. > > > void acpi_build_hest(GArray *table_data, BIOSLinker *linker, > > > const char *oem_id, const char *oem_table_id) > > > { > > > - AcpiTable table = { .sig = "HEST", .rev = 1, > > > + AcpiTable table = { .sig = "HEST", > > > + .rev = 1, /* ACPI 4.0 to 6.4 */ > > > .oem_id = oem_id, .oem_table_id = oem_table_id }; > > > > > > acpi_table_begin(&table, table_data); This hunk might still make sense, though. When double-checking the links against ACPI 6.5, I noticed that HEST now requires .rev = 2. There are some future incompatibilities, but the current implementation of acpi/ghes satisfies both rev 1 and ref 2 of HEST. Also, this is not relevant on Linux, as the revision is not checked there. So, currently this is not a problem. Thanks, Mauro