* 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.