On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 01:41:01PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
Not sure how much it counts, but I personally can agree with you on this direction :)
One note below:
@@ -603,8 +604,72 @@ acpi_setup(void) if (! CONFIG_ACPI) return;
int acpi_generate = 1;
dprintf(3, "init ACPI tables\n");
struct romfile_s *file = NULL;
for (;;) {
file = romfile_findprefix("/etc/acpi/", file);if (!file)break;/** Disable ACPI table generation. All ACPI tables must come from* etc/acpi/ romfile entries.*/acpi_generate = 0;[...]
- }
- linker_link("/etc/linker-script");
- if (!acpi_generate) {
return;- }
- dprintf(3, "generate ACPI tables\n");
- // This code is hardcoded for PIIX4 Power Management device. struct pci_device *pci = pci_find_init_device(acpi_find_tbl, NULL); if (!pci)
Are you deliberately calling linker_link() independently from "acpi_generate"? My hunch is that linker_link() only makes sense if acpi_generate == 0 (ie. qemu has passed down at least one table to repoint some pointer to), but I may be missing a use case.
Thanks Laszlo
In theory linker code is unrelated to acpi, and host can the linker to patch any romfile. I could add if (!acpi_generate) but it just seems like adding code to remove something potentially useful.