Attention is currently required from: Felix Singer, Lance Zhao, Jason Glenesk, Raul Rangel, Nico Huber, Furquan Shaikh, Marshall Dawson, Tim Wawrzynczak, Angel Pons, Patrick Rudolph, Felix Held.
Michael Niewöhner has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/58118 )
Change subject: acpigen,soc/amd/cezanne,intel/{common,skl}: rework CPPC table passing
......................................................................
Patch Set 9:
(1 comment)
Patchset:
PS8:
To me this goes into the same direction as using a static ASL table: It creates
obstacles for future code that might need more flexibility than the two tables
we currently have. Trying to decide about such things is trying to predict the
future :)
Maybe there is a good compromise: Use `static const` tables where possible locally
but keep the API (e.g. by using memcpy() to fill the passed struct). Or keep the
struct and let the provider of the table decide if they point to a static struct
or something more dynamic?
Yeah, doesn't sound bad
I just noticed a hidden change here: Setting the version is moved to the place
where the table is provided. Not sure what the original intention was wrt. this.
Very good question. Tbh I'm unsure the whole version thing.. When do we want/need to use a different version? Not sure if that's CPU or OS dependent.
I think it makes sense to set it where the table is set. Also, the three-liner
repeated in soc/intel/*, I guess that belongs in cpu/intel/common/?
You probably mean `cpu_get_cppc_table`? SKL will use common ACPI soon (CB:44138), so duplication will vanish.
Out of the many changes, I think what I actually don't like is to remove the
struct. Maybe we should keep the acpigen API as is but do all the other clean-up?
Ack
--
To view, visit
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/58118
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit
https://review.coreboot.org/settings
Gerrit-Project: coreboot
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: I26c5e80c2a16a50ed73245c7c32d61b17e45c22a
Gerrit-Change-Number: 58118
Gerrit-PatchSet: 9
Gerrit-Owner: Michael Niewöhner
foss@mniewoehner.de
Gerrit-Reviewer: Felix Singer
felixsinger@posteo.net
Gerrit-Reviewer: Angel Pons
th3fanbus@gmail.com
Gerrit-Reviewer: Felix Held
felix-coreboot@felixheld.de
Gerrit-Reviewer: Furquan Shaikh
furquan@google.com
Gerrit-Reviewer: Jason Glenesk
jason.glenesk@gmail.com
Gerrit-Reviewer: Lance Zhao
Gerrit-Reviewer: Marshall Dawson
marshalldawson3rd@gmail.com
Gerrit-Reviewer: Nico Huber
nico.h@gmx.de
Gerrit-Reviewer: Patrick Rudolph
siro@das-labor.org
Gerrit-Reviewer: Paul Menzel
paulepanter@mailbox.org
Gerrit-Reviewer: Raul Rangel
rrangel@chromium.org
Gerrit-Reviewer: Tim Wawrzynczak
inforichland@gmail.com
Gerrit-Reviewer: Tim Wawrzynczak
twawrzynczak@chromium.org
Gerrit-Reviewer: build bot (Jenkins)
no-reply@coreboot.org
Gerrit-Attention: Felix Singer
felixsinger@posteo.net
Gerrit-Attention: Lance Zhao
Gerrit-Attention: Jason Glenesk
jason.glenesk@gmail.com
Gerrit-Attention: Raul Rangel
rrangel@chromium.org
Gerrit-Attention: Nico Huber
nico.h@gmx.de
Gerrit-Attention: Furquan Shaikh
furquan@google.com
Gerrit-Attention: Marshall Dawson
marshalldawson3rd@gmail.com
Gerrit-Attention: Tim Wawrzynczak
inforichland@gmail.com
Gerrit-Attention: Tim Wawrzynczak
twawrzynczak@chromium.org
Gerrit-Attention: Angel Pons
th3fanbus@gmail.com
Gerrit-Attention: Patrick Rudolph
siro@das-labor.org
Gerrit-Attention: Felix Held
felix-coreboot@felixheld.de
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2021 16:59:58 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
Gerrit-Has-Labels: No
Comment-In-Reply-To: Nico Huber
nico.h@gmx.de
Comment-In-Reply-To: Michael Niewöhner
foss@mniewoehner.de
Gerrit-MessageType: comment