On 28 July 2015 at 21:12, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell at linaro.org>
wrote:> On 28 July 2015 at 11:27, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at redhat.com>
wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 11:12:33AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> On 28 July 2015 at 11:08, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst at
redhat.com> wrote:
>>> > On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 10:44:02AM +0100, Graeme Gregory
wrote:
>>> >> Added the match table and pointers for ACPI probing to the
driver.
>>> >>
>>> >> This uses the same identifier for virt devices as being
used for qemu
>>> >> ARM64 ACPI support.
>>> >>
>>> >>
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 QEMU 2.4
>>> > is released?
>>>
>>> Shannon's call, I guess. I don't know enough about ACPI to
say.
>>> I thought these ACPI IDs were already fixed because they were
>>> what the kernel was looking for...
>
>> Apparently not :)
>
> Mmm. I'm not terribly happy about stuff being in QEMU before the
> ACPI spec for it has been finalised. We should not be picking
> stuff randomly on the fly...
>
> If we want to fix the ACPI IDs QEMU is using for 2.4 then we
> really need to do that now (ie within the next day or two).
>
It is upto the owner of the QEMU prefix to allocate numbers. This is
not an issue for ACPI spec at all.
Graeme