Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm/virt/acpi: remove _ADR from devices identified by _HID

From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Heyi Guo <guoheyi@huawei.com>
Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
	Corey Minyard <cminyard@mvista.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhaosl@gmail.com>,
	qemu-arm@nongnu.org, Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>,
	wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm/virt/acpi: remove _ADR from devices identified by _HID
Date: Sun, 5 Jan 2020 07:33:55 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200105072504-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191219064759.35053-3-guoheyi@huawei.com>

On Thu, Dec 19, 2019 at 02:47:59PM +0800, Heyi Guo wrote:
> According to ACPI spec, _ADR should be used for device which is on a
> bus that has a standard enumeration algorithm. It does not make sense
> to have a _ADR object for devices which already have _HID and will be
> enumerated by OSPM.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Heyi Guo <guoheyi@huawei.com>

Are you sure? I would think this depends on the ID and the device
really. E.g. PCI devices all are expected to have _ADR and some of them
have a _HID.

CC Corey who added a device with both HID and ADR to x86 recenly.

Apropos Corey, why was HID APP0005 chosen?

> ---
> Cc: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhaosl@gmail.com>
> Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
> Cc: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
> Cc: qemu-arm@nongnu.org
> Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
> ---
>  hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c          |   8 --------
>  tests/data/acpi/virt/DSDT         | Bin 18449 -> 18426 bytes
>  tests/data/acpi/virt/DSDT.memhp   | Bin 19786 -> 19763 bytes
>  tests/data/acpi/virt/DSDT.numamem | Bin 18449 -> 18426 bytes
>  4 files changed, 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c b/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c
> index 9f4c7d1889..be752c0ad8 100644
> --- a/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c
> +++ b/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c
> @@ -78,11 +78,6 @@ static void acpi_dsdt_add_uart(Aml *scope, const MemMapEntry *uart_memmap,
>                               AML_EXCLUSIVE, &uart_irq, 1));
>      aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_CRS", crs));
>  
> -    /* The _ADR entry is used to link this device to the UART described
> -     * in the SPCR table, i.e. SPCR.base_address.address == _ADR.
> -     */
> -    aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_ADR", aml_int(uart_memmap->base)));
> -
>      aml_append(scope, dev);
>  }
>  
> @@ -170,7 +165,6 @@ static void acpi_dsdt_add_pci(Aml *scope, const MemMapEntry *memmap,
>      aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_CID", aml_string("PNP0A03")));
>      aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_SEG", aml_int(0)));
>      aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_BBN", aml_int(0)));
> -    aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_ADR", aml_int(0)));
>      aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_UID", aml_string("PCI0")));
>      aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_STR", aml_unicode("PCIe 0 Device")));
>      aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_CCA", aml_int(1)));
> @@ -334,7 +328,6 @@ static void acpi_dsdt_add_gpio(Aml *scope, const MemMapEntry *gpio_memmap,
>  {
>      Aml *dev = aml_device("GPO0");
>      aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_HID", aml_string("ARMH0061")));
> -    aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_ADR", aml_int(0)));
>      aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_UID", aml_int(0)));
>  
>      Aml *crs = aml_resource_template();
> @@ -364,7 +357,6 @@ static void acpi_dsdt_add_power_button(Aml *scope)
>  {
>      Aml *dev = aml_device(ACPI_POWER_BUTTON_DEVICE);
>      aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_HID", aml_string("PNP0C0C")));
> -    aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_ADR", aml_int(0)));
>      aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_UID", aml_int(0)));
>      aml_append(scope, dev);
>  }
> diff --git a/tests/data/acpi/virt/DSDT b/tests/data/acpi/virt/DSDT

Please do not include binary changes in acpi patches.

See comment at the top of tests/bios-tables-test.c for documentation
on how to update these.

-- 
MST