From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35780) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aK5VG-0002Ja-36 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 09:37:27 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aK5VC-0004GN-OA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 09:37:26 -0500 Received: from mail-pf0-x22f.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22f]:33254) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aK5VC-0004Fw-Gy for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 09:37:22 -0500 Received: by mail-pf0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id e65so118926349pfe.0 for ; Fri, 15 Jan 2016 06:37:22 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <56990425.3020004@linaro.org> Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 22:37:25 +0800 From: Shannon Zhao MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1452696857-4091-1-git-send-email-shannon.zhao@linaro.org> <20160113161641.GC10709@hawk.localdomain> <56967AA4.40300@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] ARM: Virt: Don't generate RTC ACPI device when using UEFI List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell , Laszlo Ersek Cc: Andrew Jones , Ard Biesheuvel , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" , QEMU Developers , qemu-arm , Shannon Zhao On 2016/1/15 22:34, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 13 January 2016 at 16:26, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> >On 01/13/16 17:16, Andrew Jones wrote: >>> >>On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:54:17PM +0800, Shannon Zhao wrote: >>>> >>>When booting the VM with UEFI, UEFI takes ownership of the RTC hardware. >>>> >>>While UEFI can use libfdt to disable the RTC device node in the DTB that >>>> >>>it passes to the OS, it cannot modify AML. Therefore, we won't generate >>>> >>>the RTC ACPI device at all when using UEFI. >>> >> >>> >>I think a condensed comment similar to this commit message would be nice >>> >>in build_dsdt, or somewhere. We have a policy for mach-virt of generating >>> >>ACPI for everything we generate DT. It'd be good if we documented all the >>> >>divergences in order to avoid confusion. [...] >> > >> >Good idea! > I'm happy with the code in this patch, so you can add my > Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell > Sorry, missed this. I've sent the v3. > Shannon, I'm assuming you're planning a v3 with the comment that > Andrew and Laszlo suggest. -- Shannon