[PATCH 06/10] acpi: acpitables: add SBBR compliance tests
Al Stone
al.stone at linaro.org
Mon Aug 7 17:04:17 UTC 2017
On 08/07/2017 10:53 AM, Dong Wei wrote:
> Yes, SSDT is optional.
>
>
>
> How about we change the statement “Additional definition blocks can be provided
> through SSDT tables” to “This table is optional. One or more of this table can
> be used to provide additional definition blocks”?
>
>
>
> Also in 4.4.2, change “DSDT and SSDT” to “DSDT or SSDT”.
>
>
>
> Dong
That works for me. I might reword the last sentence a little to "This table is
optional. One or more of these tables can be used to provide additional
definition blocks, but a fully functional and compliant system could have none
at all."
Or something like that to make it clearer, I guess....
Thanks, Dong.
> *From: *Supreeth Venkatesh <Supreeth.Venkatesh at arm.com>
> *Date: *Monday, August 7, 2017 at 5:18 PM
> *To: *Al Stone <al.stone at linaro.org>, Sakar Arora <Sakar.Arora at arm.com>, Alex
> Hung <alex.hung at canonical.com>, "fwts-devel at lists.ubuntu.com"
> <fwts-devel at lists.ubuntu.com>
> *Cc: *Prasanth Pulla <Prasanth.Pulla at arm.com>, Charles Garcia-Tobin
> <Charles.Garcia-Tobin at arm.com>, Dong Wei <Dong.Wei at arm.com>
> *Subject: *RE: [PATCH 06/10] acpi: acpitables: add SBBR compliance tests
>
>
>
> Al,
>
>
>
> Thanks for the input.
>
> We will talk to Charles/Dong.
>
>
>
> Supreeth
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: Al Stone [mailto:al.stone at linaro.org]
>
> Sent: Monday, August 7, 2017 11:10 AM
>
> To: Sakar Arora <Sakar.Arora at arm.com <mailto:Sakar.Arora at arm.com>>; Alex Hung
> <alex.hung at canonical.com <mailto:alex.hung at canonical.com>>;
> fwts-devel at lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:fwts-devel at lists.ubuntu.com>
>
> Cc: Supreeth Venkatesh <Supreeth.Venkatesh at arm.com
> <mailto:Supreeth.Venkatesh at arm.com>>; Prasanth Pulla <Prasanth.Pulla at arm.com
> <mailto:Prasanth.Pulla at arm.com>>; Charles Garcia-Tobin
> <Charles.Garcia-Tobin at arm.com <mailto:Charles.Garcia-Tobin at arm.com>>
>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] acpi: acpitables: add SBBR compliance tests
>
>
>
> On 08/07/2017 06:33 AM, Sakar Arora wrote:
>
> Thanks for the comments.
>
> The SBBR spec requires SSDT tables as mandatory along with the DSDT tables.
>
> http://infocenter.arm.com/help/topic/com.arm.doc.den0044b/DEN0044B_Ser
>
> ver_Base_Boot_Requirements.pdf (section 4.2.1.4)
>
> Regards,
>
> Sakar
>
>
>
> Yeah, that section is misleading. SSDT is listed as a mandatory table and it
> really should not be; the text does say "can" (vs "must") but that's not really
> enough. The SBBR needs to be fixed, IMHO. I can see how it can be read as
> mandatory, but that's really very impractical and kind of pointless. Many of
> the vendors do not have an SSDT and would have no reason to provide one, making
> the test a false negative.
>
>
>
> If you could poke Charles Garcia-Tobin at ARM about this, I'd really appreciate
> it. I can work with him on the change, if he wants.
>
>
>
> In the meantime, I'd suggest having an SSDT be optional in this test suite; if
> necessary, a warning and/or explanation could be printed.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: fwts-devel-bounces at lists.ubuntu.com
> <mailto:fwts-devel-bounces at lists.ubuntu.com>
>
> [mailto:fwts-devel-bounces at lists.ubuntu.com] On Behalf Of Al Stone
>
> Sent: Saturday, August 5, 2017 3:25 AM
>
> To: Alex Hung <alex.hung at canonical.com <mailto:alex.hung at canonical.com>>;
> fwts-devel at lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:fwts-devel at lists.ubuntu.com>
>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] acpi: acpitables: add SBBR compliance tests
>
> On 08/03/2017 06:17 PM, Alex Hung wrote:
>
> On 2017-07-24 11:10 PM, Sakar Arora wrote:
>
> From: Rajat Goyal <Rajat.Goyal at arm.com <mailto:Rajat.Goyal at arm.com>>
>
>
>
> Server Base Boot Requirements (SBBR) specification is intended for
>
> SBSA- compliant 64-bit ARMv8 servers.
>
> It defines the base firmware requirements for out-of-box support of
>
> any ARM SBSA-compatible Operating System or hypervisor.
>
> The requirements in this specification are expected to be minimal
>
> yet complete for booting a multi-core ARMv8 server platform, while
>
> leaving plenty of room for OEM or ODM innovations and design details.
>
> For more information, download the SBBR specification here:
>
> http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.den0044b
>
> /
>
> index.html
>
>
>
> This change introduces additional test cases as per sbbr.
>
> Additional tests include
>
> 1. Test that processors only exist in the _SB namespace.
>
> 2. Test DSDT and SSDT tables are implemented.
>
> 3. Check for recommended ACPI tables.
>
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Supreeth Venkatesh <supreeth.venkatesh at arm.com
> <mailto:supreeth.venkatesh at arm.com>>
>
> Signed-off-by: Rajat Goyal <Rajat.Goyal at arm.com
> <mailto:Rajat.Goyal at arm.com>>
>
> ---
>
> src/Makefile.am | 1 +
>
> src/acpi/acpitables/acpitables.c | 2 +-
>
> src/sbbr/acpitables/acpitables.c | 264
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
> 3 files changed, 266 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> create mode 100644 src/sbbr/acpitables/acpitables.c [snip....]
>
> + }
>
> + if (!checked)
>
> + fwts_aborted(fw, "Cannot find any ACPI tables.");
>
> + if (!dsdt_checked) {
>
> + fwts_failed(fw, LOG_LEVEL_HIGH, "acpi_table_check_test4",
>
> + "Test DSDT table is NOT implemented.");
>
> + }
>
> + if (!ssdt_checked) {
>
> + fwts_failed(fw, LOG_LEVEL_HIGH, "acpi_table_check_test4",
>
> + "Test SSDT table is NOT implemented.");
>
> + }
>
>
>
> SSDT is usually optional. Is it mandatory in SBBR?
>
> AFAIK, no. If I misread the language somehow, then the SBBR needs to be
> fixed, I believe. The DSDT should be the only required AML table; SSDTs
> should be entirely optional.
>
> --
>
> ciao,
>
> al
>
> -----------------------------------
>
> Al Stone
>
> Software Engineer
>
> Linaro Enterprise Group
>
> al.stone at linaro.org <mailto:al.stone at linaro.org>
>
> -----------------------------------
>
> --
>
> fwts-devel mailing list
>
> fwts-devel at lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:fwts-devel at lists.ubuntu.com>
>
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
>
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/fwts-devel
>
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the
> contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the
> information in any medium. Thank you.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> ciao,
>
> al
>
> -----------------------------------
>
> Al Stone
>
> Software Engineer
>
> Linaro Enterprise Group
>
> al.stone at linaro.org <mailto:al.stone at linaro.org>
>
> -----------------------------------
>
>
>
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient,
> please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any
> other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any
> medium. Thank you.
--
ciao,
al
-----------------------------------
Al Stone
Software Engineer
Linaro Enterprise Group
al.stone at linaro.org
-----------------------------------
More information about the fwts-devel
mailing list