Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752599AbcCDMZW (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2016 07:25:22 -0500 Received: from smtp.citrix.com ([66.165.176.89]:64345 "EHLO SMTP.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751466AbcCDMZU (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Mar 2016 07:25:20 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,535,1449532800"; d="scan'208";a="336566146" Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 12:24:21 +0000 From: Stefano Stabellini X-X-Sender: sstabellini@kaball.uk.xensource.com To: Shannon Zhao CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Len Brown , "open list:ACPI" Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 01/17] Xen: ACPI: Hide UART used by Xen In-Reply-To: <1457073455-11516-2-git-send-email-zhaoshenglong@huawei.com> Message-ID: References: <1457073455-11516-1-git-send-email-zhaoshenglong@huawei.com> <1457073455-11516-2-git-send-email-zhaoshenglong@huawei.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-DLP: MIA2 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4048 Lines: 132 On Fri, 4 Mar 2016, Shannon Zhao wrote: > From: Shannon Zhao > > ACPI 6.0 introduces a new table STAO to list the devices which are used > by Xen and can't be used by Dom0. On Xen virtual platforms, the physical > UART is used by Xen. So here it hides UART from Dom0. > > Signed-off-by: Shannon Zhao > --- > CC: "Rafael J. Wysocki" (supporter:ACPI) > CC: Len Brown (supporter:ACPI) > CC: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org (open list:ACPI) > --- > drivers/acpi/scan.c | 68 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 68 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/scan.c b/drivers/acpi/scan.c > index 407a376..31d794c 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/scan.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/scan.c > @@ -45,6 +45,7 @@ static LIST_HEAD(acpi_scan_handlers_list); > DEFINE_MUTEX(acpi_device_lock); > LIST_HEAD(acpi_wakeup_device_list); > static DEFINE_MUTEX(acpi_hp_context_lock); > +static u64 spcr_uart_addr; > > struct acpi_dep_data { > struct list_head node; > @@ -1453,6 +1454,47 @@ static int acpi_add_single_object(struct acpi_device **child, > return 0; > } > > +static acpi_status acpi_get_resource_fixed_memory32(struct acpi_resource *res, > + void *context) > +{ > + struct acpi_resource_fixed_memory32 *fixed_memory32; > + > + if (res->type != ACPI_RESOURCE_TYPE_FIXED_MEMORY32) > + return AE_OK; > + > + fixed_memory32 = &res->data.fixed_memory32; Should we call acpi_resource_to_address64 instead? Aside from this the rest looks good. > + if (!fixed_memory32) > + return AE_OK; > + > + *((u32 *)context) = fixed_memory32->address; > + return AE_CTRL_TERMINATE; > +} > + > +static bool acpi_device_should_be_hidden(acpi_handle handle) > +{ > + acpi_status status; > + u32 addr = 0; > + > + /* Check if it should ignore the UART device */ > + if (spcr_uart_addr != 0) { > + if (!acpi_has_method(handle, METHOD_NAME__CRS)) > + return false; > + > + status = acpi_walk_resources(handle, METHOD_NAME__CRS, > + acpi_get_resource_fixed_memory32, > + &addr); > + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) > + return false; > + > + if (addr == spcr_uart_addr) { > + printk(KERN_INFO PREFIX "The UART device in SPCR table will be hidden\n"); > + return true; > + } > + } > + > + return false; > +} > + > static int acpi_bus_type_and_status(acpi_handle handle, int *type, > unsigned long long *sta) > { > @@ -1466,6 +1508,9 @@ static int acpi_bus_type_and_status(acpi_handle handle, int *type, > switch (acpi_type) { > case ACPI_TYPE_ANY: /* for ACPI_ROOT_OBJECT */ > case ACPI_TYPE_DEVICE: > + if (acpi_device_should_be_hidden(handle)) > + return -ENODEV; > + > *type = ACPI_BUS_TYPE_DEVICE; > status = acpi_bus_get_status_handle(handle, sta); > if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) > @@ -1919,6 +1964,8 @@ static int acpi_bus_scan_fixed(void) > int __init acpi_scan_init(void) > { > int result; > + acpi_status status; > + struct acpi_table_stao *stao_ptr; > > acpi_pci_root_init(); > acpi_pci_link_init(); > @@ -1933,6 +1980,27 @@ int __init acpi_scan_init(void) > > acpi_scan_add_handler(&generic_device_handler); > > + /* If there is STAO table, check whether it needs to ignore the UART > + * device in SPCR table. > + */ > + status = acpi_get_table(ACPI_SIG_STAO, 0, > + (struct acpi_table_header **)&stao_ptr); > + if (ACPI_SUCCESS(status)) { > + if (stao_ptr->header.length > sizeof(struct acpi_table_stao)) > + printk(KERN_INFO PREFIX "STAO Name List not yet supported."); > + > + if (stao_ptr->ignore_uart) { > + struct acpi_table_spcr *spcr_ptr; > + > + status = acpi_get_table(ACPI_SIG_SPCR, 0, > + (struct acpi_table_header **)&spcr_ptr); > + if (ACPI_SUCCESS(status)) > + spcr_uart_addr = spcr_ptr->serial_port.address; > + else > + printk(KERN_WARNING PREFIX "STAO table present, but SPCR is missing\n"); > + } > + } > + > mutex_lock(&acpi_scan_lock); > /* > * Enumerate devices in the ACPI namespace. > -- > 2.0.4 > >