Attention is currently required from: Furquan Shaikh, Paul Menzel, Tim Wawrzynczak. Sugnan Prabhu S has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56750 )
Change subject: vc/google/chromeos: Add support for new SAR tables revisions ......................................................................
Patch Set 11:
(6 comments)
Commit Message:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56750/comment/bcf71dd5_ca7cdb54 PS10, Line 12:
Please summarize the differences to version 1 and the implementation (antgain, …). […]
The older sar table binary was supporting only revision 0 and the new implementation is supporting version 1 and 2. The blocks size with in the earlier SAR binary was static with option to make only wdgs block dynamic. The new binary can have any block as dynamic and the size of the block depends on the revision of the SAR entry.
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56750/comment/77070b77_4fa5f6f5 PS10, Line 14: TEST=Check the generated SSDT tables on brya
How exactlys
Ack
File src/drivers/wifi/generic/Kconfig:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56750/comment/312f8507_971e9bca PS10, Line 29: Enable it when wifi driver uses wifi6e/DSM configuration feature.
Can both be used at the same time? Is there a way to autodetect the version?
This cannot be used at the same time, will update the Kconfig.
There is no straight forward way to auto detect and differentiate the binary, probably using the the binary size (but need to check if one of the combination of the version in the new format will lead to old format size). First byte of each block is going to be the version based on which the following block size will be calculated in the new format of sar binary unlike the older format where no version field was present for SAR table.
File src/drivers/wifi/generic/acpi.c:
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56750/comment/bc3c0206_c246cf66 PS10, Line 57: printk(BIOS_DEBUG, "failed from getting SAR limits!\n");
Reword to “failed getting SAR limits!” could be separate commit.
Ack, I will push this as separate patch on top of the current. Let me know incase you want me to push this first.
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56750/comment/99f813ba_e97eaa0f PS10, Line 135: package_size
size_t
Done
https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/56750/comment/1f103a79_04cfa9c5 PS10, Line 221: int i, package_size;
size_t
Done