[coreboot-gerrit] [L] Change in coreboot[main]: [Squash]: Add ACPI BDAT support

[Shuo Liu (Code Review)]

Attention is currently required from: Anil Kumar K, Arthur Heymans, Bora Guvendik, Chen, Gang C, Cliff Huang, Gaggery, Jamie Ryu, Jérémy Compostella, Kane Chen, Karthik Ramasubramanian, Krishna P Bhat D, Lance Zhao, Pratikkumar V Prajapati, Ravishankar Sarawadi, Ronak Kanabar, Subrata Banik, Tim Wawrzynczak, V Sowmya, Wonkyu Kim.

Shuo Liu has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/77255?usp=email )

Change subject: [Squash]: Add ACPI BDAT support
......................................................................

Patch Set 14:

(4 comments)

Patchset:

PS14: 
Hello, we are from server coreboot team and would like to adopt this change, with some comments. Could you please check?

File src/soc/intel/common/block/acpi/acpi_bdat.c:

https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/77255/comment/acebef54_ff25913d :
PS14, Line 175: 			memcpy(next_block, schema_data, data_size);
Can we make sure in ACPI BDAT spec, all schema data are not pointers? if no pointers, the directly copy could be a pattern to apply.

File src/soc/intel/common/block/include/intelblocks/acpi_bdat.h:

https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/77255/comment/dee03acd_63b636f2 :
PS14, Line 66: 	EFI_GUID schema_hob_guids[MAX_SCHEMA_LIST_LENGTH];
Can we use base/size instead? a.k.a. some customers will create schema by themselves instead of reading HOBs from FSP (e.g. to create something beyonds FSP created HOBs, by reading registers in coreboot codes, which might be private codes, or public codes), thus giving customers some flexibility in their implementation instead of raising requests to FSP.

https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/77255/comment/d29a4a4e_3fbcad4d :
PS14, Line 67: } bdat_schema_list_hob;
Can we rename it as bdat_schema_list? a.k.a. an intel platform might use arbitrary way to collect the schema list but may not from a hob.