[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 20/24] hw: acpi: Define ACPI tables builder interface
On Fri, Nov 16, 2018 at 05:02:26PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On Mon, 5 Nov 2018 02:40:43 +0100 > Samuel Ortiz <sameo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > In order to decouple ACPI APIs from specific machine types, we are > > creating an ACPI builder interface that each ACPI platform can choose to > > implement. > > This way, a new machine type can re-use the high level ACPI APIs and > > define some custom table build methods, without having to duplicate most > > of the existing implementation only to add small variations to it. > I'm not sure about motivation behind so high APIs, > what obvious here is an extra level of indirection for not clear gain. > > Yep using table callbacks, one can attempt to generalize > acpi_setup() and help boards to decide which tables do not build > (MCFG comes to the mind). But I'm not convinced that acpi_setup() > could be cleanly generalized as a whole (probably some parts but > not everything) It's more about generalizing acpi_build(), and then having one acpi_setup for non hardware-reduced ACPI and a acpi_reduced_setup() for hardware-reduced. Right now there's no generalization at all but with this patch we could already use the same acpi_reduced_setup() implementation for both arm and i386/virt. > so it's minor benefit for extra headache of > figuring out what callback will be actually called when reading code. This is the same complexity that already exists for essentially all current interfaces. > However if board needs a slightly different table, it will have to > duplicate an exiting one and then modify to suit its needs. > > to me it pretty much looks the same as calling build_foo() > we use now but with an extra indirection level and then > duplicating the later for usage in another board in slightly > different manner. I believe what you're trying to say is that this abstraction may be useful but you're arguing the granularity is not properly defined? Am I getting this right? Cheers, Samuel. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |