This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 2] HVM vcpu add/remove: setup dsdt and madt i

To: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 2] HVM vcpu add/remove: setup dsdt and madt infrastructure for vcpu add/remove
From: Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 14:52:49 +0100
Cc: "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@xxxxxxxxx>, Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 05:53:37 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C74546BD.3F4D%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <C74546BD.3F4D%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.9.10
On Wednesday 09 December 2009 13:21:17 Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 09/12/2009 12:04, "Keir Fraser" <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> What's the MADT checksum stuff in the DSDT all about? Does the MADT
> >> really have to stay consistent and checksummed after boot - I would have
> >> assumed that it provides a boot-time snapshot of the system only, and
> >> would not be looked at by the OSPM after boot. I haven't looked at the
> >> ASL code in detail but I'll surely bet that the approach is fragile.
> >
> > Ah, this has to do with the _MAT methods doesn't it. Well, I wonder
> > whether the strategy of sharing the _MAT return values and the MADT
> > entries is actually sensible. There seems to be no really good reason to
> > do it -- they should be consistent at boot-time of course, but after boot
> > the MADT isn't expected to remain live and up-to-date I believe? Then
> > each Processor object can define its own MAT buffer which it manages
> > entirely by and for itself.
> Hmm, well, the ACPI spec's example does have the entries shared I think.
> Perhaps it does make sense then, although I'm still unsure whether
> maintaining the MADT checksum is required?

Tools like acpidump or iasl may verify the checksum.


---to satisfy European Law for business letters:
Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Karl-Hammerschmidt-Str. 34, 85609 Dornach b. Muenchen
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Andrew Bowd, Thomas M. McCoy, Giuliano Meroni
Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen
Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632

Xen-devel mailing list