* question on possible functionality... @ 2015-12-16 0:20 Al Stone 2015-12-16 3:18 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Al Stone @ 2015-12-16 0:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: ACPI Devel Mailing List Howdy. I have run into a couple of cases now where is would like to do something like the following: $ iasl --acpi-version=5.1 apic.asl to build a 5.1-compliant FADT, as compared to: $ iasl apic.asl which always expects a very recent definition of the tables being defined. Is anyone working on such a thing? Or has it been contemplated in the past and discarded for some reason? Thanks. -- ciao, al ----------------------------------- Al Stone Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. ahs3@redhat.com ----------------------------------- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: question on possible functionality... 2015-12-16 0:20 question on possible functionality Al Stone @ 2015-12-16 3:18 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2015-12-16 15:34 ` Moore, Robert 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2015-12-16 3:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Al Stone; +Cc: ACPI Devel Mailing List, David Box, Robert Moore, Lv Zheng On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 05:20:22 PM Al Stone wrote: > Howdy. > > I have run into a couple of cases now where is would like to do something > like the following: > > $ iasl --acpi-version=5.1 apic.asl > > to build a 5.1-compliant FADT, as compared to: > > $ iasl apic.asl > > which always expects a very recent definition of the tables being defined. > > Is anyone working on such a thing? Or has it been contemplated in the past > and discarded for some reason? CCing the ACPICA maintainers. Thanks, Rafael ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* RE: question on possible functionality... 2015-12-16 3:18 ` Rafael J. Wysocki @ 2015-12-16 15:34 ` Moore, Robert 2015-12-16 20:47 ` Al Stone 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Moore, Robert @ 2015-12-16 15:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rafael J. Wysocki, Al Stone; +Cc: ACPI Devel Mailing List, David Box, Zheng, Lv Yes, this is supported. Change the FADT version number to 5, and remove the version 6 field (Hypervisor Identity) from the source. [0004] Signature : "FACP" [Fixed ACPI Description Table (FADT)] [0004] Table Length : 00000114 [0001] Revision : 05 > -----Original Message----- > From: Rafael J. Wysocki [mailto:rjw@rjwysocki.net] > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 7:19 PM > To: Al Stone > Cc: ACPI Devel Mailing List; David Box; Moore, Robert; Zheng, Lv > Subject: Re: question on possible functionality... > > On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 05:20:22 PM Al Stone wrote: > > Howdy. > > > > I have run into a couple of cases now where is would like to do > > something like the following: > > > > $ iasl --acpi-version=5.1 apic.asl > > > > to build a 5.1-compliant FADT, as compared to: > > > > $ iasl apic.asl > > > > which always expects a very recent definition of the tables being > defined. > > > > Is anyone working on such a thing? Or has it been contemplated in the > > past and discarded for some reason? > > CCing the ACPICA maintainers. > > Thanks, > Rafael ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: question on possible functionality... 2015-12-16 15:34 ` Moore, Robert @ 2015-12-16 20:47 ` Al Stone 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Al Stone @ 2015-12-16 20:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Moore, Robert, Rafael J. Wysocki Cc: ACPI Devel Mailing List, David Box, Zheng, Lv On 12/16/2015 08:34 AM, Moore, Robert wrote: > Yes, this is supported. Change the FADT version number to 5, and remove the version 6 field (Hypervisor Identity) from the source. > > [0004] Signature : "FACP" [Fixed ACPI Description Table (FADT)] > [0004] Table Length : 00000114 > [0001] Revision : 05 Ooops. My bad. I thought I had sent this to the ACPICA devel list. Sorry about the noise... Thanks, Bob. I hadn't thought about doing it that way, but it's pretty obvious now that you mention it. I guess I was thinking about this from the other way around -- I would tell iasl what spec release, and it would tell me that Revision X was required for that table for that version of the spec, and then tell me if I missed (or added) fields inappropriate to that version. >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Rafael J. Wysocki [mailto:rjw@rjwysocki.net] >> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 7:19 PM >> To: Al Stone >> Cc: ACPI Devel Mailing List; David Box; Moore, Robert; Zheng, Lv >> Subject: Re: question on possible functionality... >> >> On Tuesday, December 15, 2015 05:20:22 PM Al Stone wrote: >>> Howdy. >>> >>> I have run into a couple of cases now where is would like to do >>> something like the following: >>> >>> $ iasl --acpi-version=5.1 apic.asl >>> >>> to build a 5.1-compliant FADT, as compared to: >>> >>> $ iasl apic.asl >>> >>> which always expects a very recent definition of the tables being >> defined. >>> >>> Is anyone working on such a thing? Or has it been contemplated in the >>> past and discarded for some reason? >> >> CCing the ACPICA maintainers. >> >> Thanks, >> Rafael > -- ciao, al ----------------------------------- Al Stone Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. ahs3@redhat.com ----------------------------------- ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-12-16 20:47 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2015-12-16 0:20 question on possible functionality Al Stone 2015-12-16 3:18 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2015-12-16 15:34 ` Moore, Robert 2015-12-16 20:47 ` Al Stone
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.