From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=44842 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PQRUl-0006SR-1L
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 16:24:15 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1PQRUi-0006ze-Ax
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 16:24:14 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:44721)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mtosatti@redhat.com>) id 1PQRUh-0006zI-Uu
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 08 Dec 2010 16:24:12 -0500
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 19:23:41 -0200
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20101208212341.GA14821@amt.cnet>
References: <20101208170858.GA10056@amt.cnet>
	<20101208173442.GC20507@redhat.com>
	<20101208180118.GA11016@amt.cnet>
	<20101208195835.GD20507@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20101208195835.GD20507@redhat.com>
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: seabios: acpi: add _RMV control method for PCI
	devices
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Cc: seabios@seabios.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>

On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 09:58:35PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 04:01:18PM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 07:34:42PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 03:08:59PM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > > > Use _RMV method to indicate whether device can be removed.
> > > > 
> > > But Windows still shows device as removable in the gui and allows to
> > > remove it, correct?
> > 
> > No. From "Designing Hardware for Surprise Removal under Windows XP"
> > document:
> > 
> > "An ACPI BIOS can override the Removable capability by using the _RMV
> > method ..."
> > 
> Cool. I wonder how it co-exists with _EJ0 method for the same device.

The Linux driver, at least, will use the _EJ0 method of the first device
object. I guess Windows does the same.

> > > > +#define gen_pci_device(name, nr)                                \
> > > > +        Device(SL##name) {                                      \
> > > > +            Name (_ADR, nr##0000)                               \
> > > > +            Method (_RMV) {                                     \
> > > > +                If (And(\_SB.PCI0.PCRM, ShiftLeft(1, nr))) {    \
> > > > +                    Return (0x1)                                \
> > > > +                }                                               \
> > > > +                Return (0x0)                                    \
> > > > +            }                                                   \
> > > > +            Name (_SUN, name)                                   \
> > > > +        }
> > > Why not add this to hotplug_slot() macro?
> > 
> > Because its ignored if declared in the device object thats a child
> > of SB.PCI0 (hotplug_slot). 
> Any idea why?
> 
> --
> 			Gleb.

Because _EJ0 overrides _RMV when deciding removability, inside a
device object (just checked). So the above "if declared in a child of
SB.PCI0..." is wrong.