Questions about ACPI compliance test RSDPBadOEMId

[Patrick Georgi]

Hi,

Thanks for the tools! I just tried the ACPI tests on a coreboot system and they reported a number of issues that I'm now working on.

RSDPBadOEMId is one of them and it claims that we're not in compliance with the spec because we use "CORE  " for the oemid field, and the spaces aren't covered by isalnum(), which is used for this test.
I couldn't find this requirement in the ACPI specification, but I know there are many reasons for implementations to be stricter than required by the spec (eg. because of unusual operating system implementations).

Now I wonder if I should adapt coreboot to avoid spaces in this field, or if the test is overly strict (and may be better served with isprint(), for example).

(side-note: the advice to that test states "make the firmware ACPI compl_ai_nt.")

Thanks,
Patrick

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/fwts-devel/attachments/20150808/29483f2a/attachment.pgp>