On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 12:41:18AM +0800, Liu, Jinsong wrote:
Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 09:19:13PM +0800, Liu, Jinsong wrote:
Avi Kivity wrote:
Very nice. I thought about doing this but abandoned it as unmaintainable. Using external functions and the ID variable, however, reduces the mess to tolerable proportions, and gains us a lot of flexibility. We can now have any combinations of sockets and installed cpus.
Agree, only 1 concern will it bring debugable/ scalable issue by hardcode aml code?
I've updated the patch (see below). This version documents how one can build a new version of the Processor() ssdt snippet.
I've tested this under linux - there were a few bugs in the previous patch. I also had to replace the dynamically created CPUS array with a dynamically created NTFY method - which is a bit more complicated.
Yeah, thanks Kevin. After you done patch and draft test, our QA may do nightly test.
Hi Jinsong,
Have you had any feedback from tests?
Thanks, -Kevin