[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 02/17] acpi: x86: deduplicate HPET AML building
From: |
Igor Mammedov |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH 02/17] acpi: x86: deduplicate HPET AML building |
Date: |
Thu, 7 Jul 2022 12:55:43 +0200 |
On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 06:08:35 -0400
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2022 at 11:16:16AM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > On Fri, 1 Jul 2022 12:26:16 -0400
> > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jul 01, 2022 at 09:35:00AM -0400, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > > > HPET AML doesn't depend on piix4 nor q35, move code buiding it
> > > > to common scope to avoid duplication.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
> > >
> > > Apropos, tests/data/acpi/rebuild-expected-aml.sh ignores the
> > > fact that some tables might be identical. Also, there's no
> > > way to reuse expected files between machines. And so we have:
> > >
> > >
> > > [qemu]$ find tests/data/acpi -type f -exec sha256sum '{}' ';'|sort
> > [...]
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > It's easy to fix up duplications within virt. But I am not 100% sure how
> > > fix up duplication between q35 and pc.
> > [...]
> >
> > > Then we could maybe use the directory "pc" for files common to i440fx
> > > and q35. Maybe just teach the test to look under tests/data/acpi/x86
> > > too? And I think we should teach tests/data/acpi/rebuild-expected-aml.sh
> > > to check for duplicates and at least warn the user.
> >
> > Probably duplicates in 'virt' mostly due to combination of not knowing
> > that there is a fallback lookup (which is hidden in the code)
> > and simplistic way tests/data/acpi/rebuild-expected-aml.sh rebuilds tables.
> >
> > As you suggest, rebuild-expected-aml.sh can be improved to warn or even
> > better drop duplicates if found.
>
> Want to try?
I'll put it on my queue, after PCI refactorings
>
> > As for reusing tables between different machine types, alternatively
> > we can add explicit remapping rules (possibly auto-generated) versus
> > currently used implicit fallback approach.
>
> My worry with this is that if a specific table needs to be split from
> the generic variant then user would have to hack the test code as opposed
> to just updating the tables, so the update can not be done
> automatically. Thoughts?
I'll try to implement it and see if it's possible.
- [PATCH 00/17] acpi:pc/q35: minor PCI refactoring/cleanups, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01
- [PATCH 10/17] tests: acpi: update expected blobs, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01
- [PATCH 04/17] tests: acpi: whitelist pc/q35 DSDT due to HPET AML move, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01
- [PATCH 03/17] tests: acpi: update expected blobs after HPET move, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01
- [PATCH 07/17] tests: acpi: update expected blobs, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01
- [PATCH 08/17] tests: acpi: whitelist pc/q35 DSDT before switching _DSM to use ASUN, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01
- [PATCH 02/17] acpi: x86: deduplicate HPET AML building, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01
[PATCH 01/17] tests: acpi: whitelist pc/q35 DSDT due to HPET AML move, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01
[PATCH 11/17] tests: acpi: whitelist pc/q35 DSDT before moving _ADR field, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01
[PATCH 17/17] x86: pci: acpi: deduplate PCI slots creation, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01
[PATCH 06/17] x86: acpi: _DSM: use Package to pass parameters, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01
[PATCH 15/17] x86: pci: acpi: reorder Device's _DSM method, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01
[PATCH 16/17] tests: acpi: update expected blobs, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01
[PATCH 05/17] acpi: x86: refactor PDSM method to reduce nesting, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01
[PATCH 14/17] tests: acpi: whitelist pc/q35 DSDT before moving _ADR field, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01
[PATCH 12/17] x86: pci: acpi: reorder Device's _ADR and _SUN fields, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01
[PATCH 13/17] tests: acpi: update expected blobs, Igor Mammedov, 2022/07/01