From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=56903 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OP6FV-0008Ij-MI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jun 2010 23:58:42 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OP6FU-0007mW-C0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jun 2010 23:58:41 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:59959) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OP6FT-0007m5-W0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Jun 2010 23:58:40 -0400 Message-ID: <4C199D68.8070204@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 06:58:32 +0300 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20100614083053.GC21797@redhat.com> <20100614135425.GA18002@morn.localdomain> <20100614140959.GI21797@redhat.com> <4C1641EF.9070001@redhat.com> <20100614182521.GA22454@morn.localdomain> <4C16852F.9070904@codemonkey.ws> <4C1705FB.2040605@redhat.com> <20100615065047.GL21797@redhat.com> <20100617014729.GC1081@morn.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <20100617014729.GC1081@morn.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [SeaBIOS] [PATCHv2] load hpet info for HPET ACPI table from qemu List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Kevin O'Connor Cc: seabios@seabios.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Gleb Natapov On 06/17/2010 04:47 AM, Kevin O'Connor wrote: > > BTW, it's been said several times now that ACPI is an interface > between OS and firmware. I don't see this at all - ACPI defines how > the OS can interact with the hardware. The only place I know of where > seabios has involvement is with it's tiny (16 asm statement) SMI stub. > Everything else describes the hardware and enables interactions > directly with the hardware. > In general, ACPI code can work with memory or device registers that have been initialized by the BIOS and depend on them. It's possible to write ACPI code that depends on preceding BIOS code. I don't know if that's the case with our ACPI implementation. -- I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this signature is too narrow to contain.