Wait, I thought it had to be 4 characters.
ron
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 2:36 PM Aaron Durbin via coreboot < coreboot@coreboot.org> wrote:
On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Duncan Laurie dlaurie@chromium.org wrote:
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 6:49 AM, Aaron Durbin adurbin@google.com
wrote:
On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 10:17 PM, Julius Werner jwerner@chromium.org wrote:
I think we should only export the coreboot table location and size through ACPI and then read everything else from there. That way we can share almost all of the kernel driver code with ARM and just need a tiny platform-specific stub to look up the table location first. If we add all the information into an actual ACPI table, we're building an x86-only solution again. (A generic, platform-independent coreboot driver could just as easily export the stuff we want into sysfs.)
That's fine. The only thing I was concerned about was implementing an ACPI table proper or try to do some ACPI device shenanigans like the ramoops device. coreboot doesn't currently have a ACPI ID assigned to it. If we go with a ACPI device coreboot should apply for an ACPI ID. I personally think the coreboot ACPI table seems more straight forward, but I was wondering if people knew of any downsides to going that route.
The official tables are all defined in the ACPI spec while the related tables are also linked to from the spec, so we'd need to convince the
UEFI
forum to at least reserve the signature for us (and then link to our
table
definition) since they intend to act as gatekeepers to avoid collisions
in
table signatures:
"Requests to reserve a 4-byte alphanumeric table signature should be
sent to
the email address info@acpi.info and should include the purpose of the
table
and reference URL to a document that describes the table format."
An easier path would be to define a specific device in the DSDT and
populate
it with the various data we want to be there on every system. That would allow us to control the format and be able to alter it in the future if
we
want to expose new information.
As you note a Device would need a valid unique HID, and that needs an ID prefix if it wants to be official. In theory we could request something like "CORE" as an official APCI ID from http://www.uefi.org/PNP_ACPI_Registry
OK. Time for bikeshedding:
- CORE
- CBOOT
- ... ?
Stefan, we'll likely need you to request the HID w/ your coreboot.org email.
I suppose the real difference between the two is whether we need this
data
early in boot before there is an AML interpreter available in the OS.
I don't think we need it that early. Right now the current usage (at least on x86) is all very late since we're doing AML evaluation. We could go w/ the ACPI device first. Just need to request that HID.
-duncan
-- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
-- coreboot mailing list: coreboot@coreboot.org https://www.coreboot.org/mailman/listinfo/coreboot
-
ron minnich