From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Al Stone Subject: Re: question on possible functionality... Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2015 13:47:44 -0700 Message-ID: <5671CDF0.7070100@redhat.com> References: <5670AE46.1000107@redhat.com> <2082437.3D9tUlxHqv@vostro.rjw.lan> <94F2FBAB4432B54E8AACC7DFDE6C92E37DA71480@ORSMSX112.amr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33406 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753762AbbLPUrp (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Dec 2015 15:47:45 -0500 In-Reply-To: <94F2FBAB4432B54E8AACC7DFDE6C92E37DA71480@ORSMSX112.amr.corp.intel.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org 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 -----------------------------------