[PATCH] Add support for ACPI 6.5 _UPC return values

ivanhu ivan.hu at canonical.com
Wed Dec 20 09:55:48 UTC 2023



On 12/15/23 02:42, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> The ACPI 6.5 specification includes `USB-C Port Capabilities` as
> part of the possible return values for `_UPC`.
> 
> Add checks that match this guidance.
> 
> Link: https://uefi.org/specs/ACPI/6.5/09_ACPI_Defined_Devices_and_Device_Specific_Objects.html?highlight=upc#upc-usb-port-capabilities
> Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello at amd.com>
> ---
>   src/acpi/method/method.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>   1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/src/acpi/method/method.c b/src/acpi/method/method.c
> index 27e2410d..32c8d2d4 100644
> --- a/src/acpi/method/method.c
> +++ b/src/acpi/method/method.c
> @@ -2844,12 +2844,12 @@ static void method_test_UPC_return(
>   	ACPI_OBJECT *obj,
>   	void *private)
>   {
> -	uint32_t i, connector_type;
> +	uint32_t i, connector_type, capabilities;
>   
>   	static const fwts_package_element elements[] = {
>   		{ ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER,	"Connectable" },
>   		{ ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER,	"Type" },
> -		{ ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER,	"Reserved0" },
> +		{ ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER,	"USB-C Port Capabilities" },
>   		{ ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER,	"Reserved1" },
>   	};
>   
> @@ -2868,7 +2868,29 @@ static void method_test_UPC_return(
>   		return;
>   	}
>   
> -	for (i = 2; i < 4; i++) {
> +	capabilities = obj->Package.Elements[2].Integer.Value;
> +	switch (connector_type) {
> +	case 0x08:
> +	case 0x09:
> +	case 0x0a:
> +		if (capabilities & 0xffffffc0) {
> +			fwts_failed(fw, LOG_LEVEL_MEDIUM, "Method_UPCBadReturnType",
> +				"%s %s set reserved bits (%d)",
> +				name, elements[2].name, capabilities);
> +			return;
> +		}
> +		break;
> +	default:
> +		if (capabilities != 0) {
> +			fwts_failed(fw, LOG_LEVEL_MEDIUM, "Method_UPCBadReturnType",
> +				"%s %s returned %d which is incompatible with connector type %d.",
> +				name, elements[2].name, capabilities, connector_type);
> +			return;
> +		}
> +		break;
> +	}
> +
> +	for (i = 3; i < 4; i++) {
>   		if (obj->Package.Elements[i].Integer.Value != 0) {

I think use,
if (obj->Package.Elements[3].Integer.Value != 0) {

then we can get rid of for loop.

Cheers,
Ivan

>   			fwts_failed(fw, LOG_LEVEL_MEDIUM,
>   				"Method_UPCBadReturnType",



More information about the fwts-devel mailing list