Displaying 15 results from an estimated 15 matches for "virtio_mmio_acpi_match".
2015 Jul 28
3
[PATCH] virtio_mmio: add ACPI probing
...<linux/acpi.h>
#include <linux/highmem.h>
#include <linux/interrupt.h>
#include <linux/io.h>
@@ -732,12 +733,21 @@ static struct of_device_id virtio_mmio_match[] = {
};
MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, virtio_mmio_match);
+#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
+static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = {
+ { "LNRO0005", },
+ { }
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, virtio_mmio_acpi_match);
+#endif
+
static struct platform_driver virtio_mmio_driver = {
.probe = virtio_mmio_probe,
.remove = virtio_mmio_remove,
.driver = {
.name = "virtio-mmio",
.of_match_table = vi...
2015 Jul 28
3
[PATCH] virtio_mmio: add ACPI probing
...<linux/acpi.h>
#include <linux/highmem.h>
#include <linux/interrupt.h>
#include <linux/io.h>
@@ -732,12 +733,21 @@ static struct of_device_id virtio_mmio_match[] = {
};
MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, virtio_mmio_match);
+#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
+static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = {
+ { "LNRO0005", },
+ { }
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, virtio_mmio_acpi_match);
+#endif
+
static struct platform_driver virtio_mmio_driver = {
.probe = virtio_mmio_probe,
.remove = virtio_mmio_remove,
.driver = {
.name = "virtio-mmio",
.of_match_table = vi...
2015 Jul 28
0
[PATCH] virtio_mmio: add ACPI probing
.../highmem.h>
> #include <linux/interrupt.h>
> #include <linux/io.h>
> @@ -732,12 +733,21 @@ static struct of_device_id virtio_mmio_match[] = {
> };
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, virtio_mmio_match);
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> +static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = {
> + { "LNRO0005", },
> + { }
> +};
Hmm - we have reserved QEMUXXXX in ASWG explicitly for this purpose.
Pater - do you think it's a good idea to change this before QEMU 2.4
is released?
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, virtio_mmio_acpi_match);
> +#endif
> +
>...
2015 Jul 29
0
[PATCH] virtio_mmio: add ACPI probing
.../highmem.h>
> #include <linux/interrupt.h>
> #include <linux/io.h>
> @@ -732,12 +733,21 @@ static struct of_device_id virtio_mmio_match[] = {
> };
> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, virtio_mmio_match);
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> +static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = {
> + { "LNRO0005", },
> + { }
> +};
> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, virtio_mmio_acpi_match);
> +#endif
> +
> static struct platform_driver virtio_mmio_driver = {
> .probe = virtio_mmio_probe,
> .remove = virtio_mmio_remove,
> .driver = {
> ....
2015 Jul 30
1
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] arm: change vendor ID for virtio-mmio
...So that guests that bind to this interface will work fine with non QEMU
> implementations of virtio-mmio.
>
I think kernel driver supports multiple IDs. If they don't want to
"QEMUXXXX" as ACPI ID, it's free to add a new one like below.
+static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = {
+ { "QEMU0005", },
+ { "1AF4103F", },
+ { }
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, virtio_mmio_acpi_match);
> It's just playing nice with others.
>
> We could have done something similar to pvpanic as well, except we
> didn't and guests using the...
2015 Jul 30
1
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] arm: change vendor ID for virtio-mmio
...So that guests that bind to this interface will work fine with non QEMU
> implementations of virtio-mmio.
>
I think kernel driver supports multiple IDs. If they don't want to
"QEMUXXXX" as ACPI ID, it's free to add a new one like below.
+static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = {
+ { "QEMU0005", },
+ { "1AF4103F", },
+ { }
+};
+MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, virtio_mmio_acpi_match);
> It's just playing nice with others.
>
> We could have done something similar to pvpanic as well, except we
> didn't and guests using the...
2015 Jul 28
3
[PATCH] virtio_mmio: add ACPI probing
...ude <linux/interrupt.h>
>> #include <linux/io.h>
>> @@ -732,12 +733,21 @@ static struct of_device_id virtio_mmio_match[] = {
>> };
>> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, virtio_mmio_match);
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
>> +static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = {
>> + { "LNRO0005", },
>> + { }
>> +};
>
> Hmm - we have reserved QEMUXXXX in ASWG explicitly for this purpose.
>
> Pater - do you think it's a good idea to change this before QEMU 2.4
> is released?
Shannon's call, I guess. I don'...
2015 Jul 28
3
[PATCH] virtio_mmio: add ACPI probing
...ude <linux/interrupt.h>
>> #include <linux/io.h>
>> @@ -732,12 +733,21 @@ static struct of_device_id virtio_mmio_match[] = {
>> };
>> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, virtio_mmio_match);
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
>> +static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = {
>> + { "LNRO0005", },
>> + { }
>> +};
>
> Hmm - we have reserved QEMUXXXX in ASWG explicitly for this purpose.
>
> Pater - do you think it's a good idea to change this before QEMU 2.4
> is released?
Shannon's call, I guess. I don'...
2015 Jul 28
2
[PATCH] virtio_mmio: add ACPI probing
...> http://git.linaro.org/people/shannon.zhao/qemu.git/commit/d0bf1955a3ecbab4b51d46f8c5dda02b7e14a17e
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory at linaro.org>
>> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
>> >> +static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = {
>> >> + { "LNRO0005", },
>> >> + { }
>> >> +};
>> >
>> > Hmm - we have reserved QEMUXXXX in ASWG explicitly for this purpose.
>> >
>> > Pater - do you think it's a good idea to change this before QEM...
2015 Jul 28
2
[PATCH] virtio_mmio: add ACPI probing
...> http://git.linaro.org/people/shannon.zhao/qemu.git/commit/d0bf1955a3ecbab4b51d46f8c5dda02b7e14a17e
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory at linaro.org>
>> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
>> >> +static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = {
>> >> + { "LNRO0005", },
>> >> + { }
>> >> +};
>> >
>> > Hmm - we have reserved QEMUXXXX in ASWG explicitly for this purpose.
>> >
>> > Pater - do you think it's a good idea to change this before QEM...
2015 Jul 30
2
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] arm: change vendor ID for virtio-mmio
On 2015/7/30 3:16, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> ACPI spec 5.0 allows the use of PCI vendor IDs.
>
But virtio-mmio is not a PCI device, it's a platform device.
Why do we drop the previous way using "QEMUXXXX"? Something I missed?
> Since we have one for virtio, it seems neater to use that
> rather than LNRO. For the device ID, use 103F which is a legacy ID that
>
2015 Jul 28
0
[PATCH] virtio_mmio: add ACPI probing
...>> #include <linux/io.h>
> >> @@ -732,12 +733,21 @@ static struct of_device_id virtio_mmio_match[] = {
> >> };
> >> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, virtio_mmio_match);
> >>
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
> >> +static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = {
> >> + { "LNRO0005", },
> >> + { }
> >> +};
> >
> > Hmm - we have reserved QEMUXXXX in ASWG explicitly for this purpose.
> >
> > Pater - do you think it's a good idea to change this before QEMU 2.4
> > is released?...
2015 Jul 28
1
[PATCH] virtio_mmio: add ACPI probing
...ro.org/people/shannon.zhao/qemu.git/commit/d0bf1955a3ecbab4b51d46f8c5dda02b7e14a17e
>>> >>
>>> >> Signed-off-by: Graeme Gregory <graeme.gregory at linaro.org>
>
>>> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
>>> >> +static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = {
>>> >> + { "LNRO0005", },
>>> >> + { }
>>> >> +};
>>> >
>>> > Hmm - we have reserved QEMUXXXX in ASWG explicitly for this purpose.
>>> >
>>> > Pater - do you think it's a good id...
2015 Jul 28
2
[PATCH] virtio_mmio: add ACPI probing
...inux/io.h>
>> >> @@ -732,12 +733,21 @@ static struct of_device_id virtio_mmio_match[] = {
>> >> };
>> >> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, virtio_mmio_match);
>> >>
>> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
>> >> +static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = {
>> >> + { "LNRO0005", },
>> >> + { }
>> >> +};
>> >
>> > Hmm - we have reserved QEMUXXXX in ASWG explicitly for this purpose.
>> >
>> > Pater - do you think it's a good idea to change this before QEM...
2015 Jul 28
2
[PATCH] virtio_mmio: add ACPI probing
...inux/io.h>
>> >> @@ -732,12 +733,21 @@ static struct of_device_id virtio_mmio_match[] = {
>> >> };
>> >> MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, virtio_mmio_match);
>> >>
>> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
>> >> +static const struct acpi_device_id virtio_mmio_acpi_match[] = {
>> >> + { "LNRO0005", },
>> >> + { }
>> >> +};
>> >
>> > Hmm - we have reserved QEMUXXXX in ASWG explicitly for this purpose.
>> >
>> > Pater - do you think it's a good idea to change this before QEM...