QEMU does not provide a HPET block if it was configured with -no-hpet, other machines SeaBIOS runs on may lack a HPET as well. Perform basic checks the ID register for a reasonable vendor ID and a clock period within the valid range, do not build the HPET table if that fails.
Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka jan.kiszka@siemens.com ---
This allows to postpone the hpet_fw_cfg vs. ACPI discussion until we have >1 HPET blocks and/or put them at non-standard addresses.
src/acpi.c | 14 +++++++++++++- 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/acpi.c b/src/acpi.c index ea7b171..29160f4 100644 --- a/src/acpi.c +++ b/src/acpi.c @@ -158,6 +158,9 @@ struct acpi_20_hpet { } PACKED; #define ACPI_HPET_ADDRESS 0xFED00000UL
+#define HPET_ID 0x000 +#define HPET_PERIOD 0x004 + /* * SRAT (NUMA topology description) table */ @@ -464,7 +467,16 @@ build_ssdt(void) static void* build_hpet(void) { - struct acpi_20_hpet *hpet = malloc_high(sizeof(*hpet)); + struct acpi_20_hpet *hpet; + const void *hpet_base = (void *)ACPI_HPET_ADDRESS; + u32 hpet_vendor = readl(hpet_base + HPET_ID) >> 16; + u32 hpet_period = readl(hpet_base + HPET_PERIOD); + + if (hpet_vendor == 0 || hpet_vendor == 0xffff || + hpet_period == 0 || hpet_period > 0x05F5E100) + return NULL; + + hpet = malloc_high(sizeof(*hpet)); if (!hpet) { warn_noalloc(); return NULL;
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 05:50:10PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
QEMU does not provide a HPET block if it was configured with -no-hpet, other machines SeaBIOS runs on may lack a HPET as well. Perform basic checks the ID register for a reasonable vendor ID and a clock period within the valid range, do not build the HPET table if that fails.
It looks okay to me.
BTW, any particular reason to use 0x05F5E100 instead of 100000000?
-Kevin
On 2011-08-30 02:35, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 05:50:10PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
QEMU does not provide a HPET block if it was configured with -no-hpet, other machines SeaBIOS runs on may lack a HPET as well. Perform basic checks the ID register for a reasonable vendor ID and a clock period within the valid range, do not build the HPET table if that fails.
It looks okay to me.
BTW, any particular reason to use 0x05F5E100 instead of 100000000?
No, I just blindly grabbed the first number I found in the spec. You may change if you like on commit.
Jan