Re: RE: [PATCH 1/2] Vcpu hotplug: Move ACPI processor from \_PR to \_SB

[Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com>]

On 12/02/2010 09:25, "Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@intel.com> wrote:

>> I'd be a bit more comfortable if we had the cover of lots of other modern
>> systems putting their processor objects under \_SB, but actually I've never
>> seen one. Then again I haven't been looking at high-end systems supporting
>> CPU hotplug and the like.
> 
> Yes. I only saw \_SB definition in system supporting CPU hotplug. In fact, in
> that system, the processor is defined under an container object in \_SB. As
> currently all system in our lab is shutdown for CNY, I can't find more system
> to check. And I suspect that we need care \_PR soluation, legacy OS support is
> an important usage model for virtualization.
> 
> One thing I noticed in my system is, there is a ACPI version option in my
> desktop system, and I remember I saw that option in other system also. So one
> possible solution is, place all processor definition under a seperated SSDT
> file. An option is provided so that build.c can select different SSDT based on
> user's input. But that make thing tricky still.

You can see that xen-unstable tip can do this now. But I don't want to start
dumping in loads of alternative DSDTs, as each one is a fair size. What I'm
hoping is that this Linux regression is fixed fairly swiftly, and we can
hence ignore it. :-) If not, we can think about what to do.

 -- Keir