Question about madt_find_processor_uid() and madt_processor_handler()

[Alex Hung]

On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 7:02 PM Zeng, Star <star.zeng at intel.com> wrote:

> Actually, it is we have platforms declare the device and method as below
> indeed for many generations, we do not see any issue.
>
>
>
>   Device(XXXX) {
>
>     Name(_HID, "ACPI0007")
>
>     Method (_UID) {
>
>       Return (\_SB.XXXX(XXXX, XXXX))
>
> }
>
> …
>
>
>
> But fwts-live-21.05.00.img.xz complains the failure as below. We do not
> understand how the tool handles the Method (_UID) case and do the matching
> since it generates the ID dynamically but statically.
>
>
>
> PASSED: Test 5, MADT revision 4 is defined.
>
> PASSED: Test 5, MADT subtable type 0 (Processor Local APIC) is defined.
>
>
> PASSED: Test 5, Subtable 1 (offset 0x2c) of type 0 (Processor Local APIC) is the
>
> correct length: 8
>
>
> FAILED [MEDIUM] MADTLAPICUidMismatch: Test 5, LAPIC has no matching processor
>
> UID 0
>

This failure may have other meanings and requires more complete acpi tables
for more analysis.



>
> PASSED: Test 5, MADT Processor Local APIC flags field, bits 1..31 are reserved
>
> and properly set to zero.
>
> PASSED: Test 5, MADT subtable type 0 (Processor Local APIC) is defined.
>
>
> PASSED: Test 5, Subtable 2 (offset 0x34) of type 0 (Processor Local APIC) is the
>
> correct length: 8
>
>
> FAILED [MEDIUM] MADTLAPICUidMismatch: Test 5, LAPIC has no matching processor
>
> UID 1
>
>
> PASSED: Test 5, MADT Processor Local APIC flags field, bits 1..31 are reserved
>
> and properly set to zero.
>
> …
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Star
>
> *From:* Alex Hung <alex.hung at canonical.com>
> *Sent:* 2021年7月13日 0:59
> *To:* Zeng, Star <star.zeng at intel.com>
> *Cc:* fwts-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> *Subject:* Re: Question about madt_find_processor_uid() and
> madt_processor_handler()
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 5:30 AM Zeng, Star <star.zeng at intel.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> About madt_find_processor_uid() and madt_processor_handler(), my
> understanding is that they will find and check uid for processors based on
> Processor object or Device Object (ACPI0007), right?
>
>
>
> For the Device Object (ACPI0007) case, could the codes handle the _UID
> implemented as Method?
>
>
>
>   Device(XXXX) {
>
>     Name(_HID, "ACPI0007")
>
>     Method (_UID) {
>
>       Return (\_SB.XXXX(XXXX, XXXX))
>
> }
>
> …
>
>
>
>
>
> Table 6-189 Device Identification Objects
> _UID Object that specifies a device’s unique persistent ID, or a control
> method that generates it.
>
>
>
>
>
> Evalucating _UID is handled by acpica, and I believe acpica evaluates name
> and method objects equally.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Star
>
> --
> fwts-devel mailing list
> fwts-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/fwts-devel
>
>
>
> --
>
> Cheers,
> Alex Hung
>


-- 
Cheers,
Alex Hung
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/fwts-devel/attachments/20210712/33251c05/attachment.html>