Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 03/23] acpi/hvmloader: Initialize vm_gid data outside ACPI code

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 09.08.16 at 15:50, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 08/09/2016 09:11 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 04.08.16 at 23:06, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> --- a/tools/firmware/hvmloader/acpi/build.c
>>> +++ b/tools/firmware/hvmloader/acpi/build.c
>>> @@ -462,32 +462,26 @@ static int construct_secondary_tables(unsigned long 
>>> *table_ptrs,
>>>   *
>>>   * Return 0 if memory failure, != 0 if success
>>>   */
>>> -static int new_vm_gid(struct acpi_info *acpi_info)
>>> +static int new_vm_gid(struct acpi_config *config,
>>> +                      struct acpi_info *info)
>>>  {
>>> -    uint64_t vm_gid[2], *buf;
>>> -    const char * s;
>>> -    char *end;
>>> -
>>> -    acpi_info->vm_gid_addr = 0;
>>> -
>>> -    /* read ID and check for 0 */
>>> -    s = xenstore_read("platform/generation-id", "0:0");
>>> -    vm_gid[0] = strtoll(s, &end, 0);
>>> -    vm_gid[1] = 0;
>>> -    if ( end && end[0] == ':' )
>>> -        vm_gid[1] = strtoll(end+1, NULL, 0);
>>> -    if ( !vm_gid[0] && !vm_gid[1] )
>>> +    uint64_t *buf;
>>> +
>>> +    info->vm_gid_addr = 0;
>>> +
>>> +    /* check for 0 ID*/
>>> +    if ( !config->vm_gid[0] && !config->vm_gid[1] )
>>>          return 1;
>>>  
>>>      /* copy to allocate BIOS memory */
>>> -    buf = (uint64_t *) mem_alloc(sizeof(vm_gid), 8);
>>> +    buf = mem_alloc(sizeof(config->vm_gid), 8);
>>>      if ( !buf )
>>>          return 0;
>>> -    memcpy(buf, vm_gid, sizeof(vm_gid));
>>> +    memcpy(buf, config->vm_gid, sizeof(config->vm_gid));
>>>  
>>> -    /* set into ACPI table and HVM param the address */
>>> -    acpi_info->vm_gid_addr = virt_to_phys(buf);
>>> -    hvm_param_set(HVM_PARAM_VM_GENERATION_ID_ADDR, acpi_info->vm_gid_addr);
>>> +    /* set the address into ACPI table and also pass it back to the caller 
>>> */
>>> +    info->vm_gid_addr = virt_to_phys(buf);
>> What consumer of this value is left? Can't that field go away now?
> 
> In acpi_info? TBH, I don't know, I thought this was introduced to deal
> with something in Windows (commit 978cc62b looks generic but then
> c5a29a87 is for Windows).

Sure, but the need for the field appears to go away with the
introduction of the one in acpi_config.

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel