Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 08/11] pvh/acpi: Handle ACPI accesses for PVH guests

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 15.11.16 at 16:44, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 11/15/2016 10:17 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> The other option was XEN_X86_EMU_ACPI. Would it be better?
>> As that's a little too wide (and I think someone else had also
>> disliked it for that reason), how about XEN_X86_EMU_ACPI_FF
>> (for "fixed features"), or if that's still too wide, break things up
>> (PM1a, PM1b, PM2, TMR, GPE0, GPE1)?
> 
> I think this may be a bit too fine-grained. Fixed-features would be
> good, but is GPE block considered part of fixed features?

See figure 4-12 in ACPI 6.1: GEP{0,1} are included there, and the
text ahead of this makes it pretty clear that altogether they're
being called fixed hardware register blocks. So if you consider FF
misleading, FHRB would be another option.

Jan


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