[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] acpi: tpm: Add missing device identification objects
|
From: |
Ani Sinha |
|
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] acpi: tpm: Add missing device identification objects |
|
Date: |
Tue, 4 Jan 2022 20:45:24 +0530 (IST) |
|
User-agent: |
Alpine 2.20 (OSX 67 2015-01-07) |
On Tue, 4 Jan 2022, Stefan Berger wrote:
>
> On 1/4/22 04:55, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Dec 2021 21:23:09 -0500
> > Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Add missing device identification objects _STR and _UID. They will appear
> > why, does it break anything or it's just cosmetic?
>
> I don't know about whether any software needs these entries but it's driven by
> this:
>
> https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/708
Ok so you might want to add
Resolves: https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/708
in the commit message. Please see:
https://www.qemu.org/docs/master/devel/submitting-a-patch.html#write-a-meaningful-commit-message
>
> >
> > > as files 'description' and 'uid' under Linux sysfs.
> > >
> > > Cc: Shannon Zhao <shannon.zhaosl@gmail.com>
> > > Cc: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> > > Cc: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
> > > Cc: Ani Sinha <ani@anisinha.ca>
> > > Fixes: https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/708
> > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Berger <stefanb@linux.ibm.com>
> > > Message-id: 20211110133559.3370990-3-stefanb@linux.ibm.com
> > > ---
> > > hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c | 1 +
> > > hw/i386/acpi-build.c | 8 ++++++++
> > > 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c b/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c
> > > index d0f4867fdf..f2514ce77c 100644
> > > --- a/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c
> > > +++ b/hw/arm/virt-acpi-build.c
> > > @@ -229,6 +229,7 @@ static void acpi_dsdt_add_tpm(Aml *scope,
> > > VirtMachineState *vms)
> > > Aml *dev = aml_device("TPM0");
> > > aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_HID", aml_string("MSFT0101")));
> > > + aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_STR", aml_string("TPM 2.0 Device")));
> > > aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_UID", aml_int(0)));
> > > Aml *crs = aml_resource_template();
> > > diff --git a/hw/i386/acpi-build.c b/hw/i386/acpi-build.c
> > > index 8383b83ee3..2fb70847cb 100644
> > > --- a/hw/i386/acpi-build.c
> > > +++ b/hw/i386/acpi-build.c
> > > @@ -1812,11 +1812,15 @@ build_dsdt(GArray *table_data, BIOSLinker *linker,
> > > dev = aml_device("TPM");
> > > aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_HID",
> > >
> > > aml_string("MSFT0101")));
> > > + aml_append(dev,
> > > + aml_name_decl("_STR",
> > > + aml_string("TPM 2.0
> > > Device")));
> > > } else {
> > > dev = aml_device("ISA.TPM");
> > > aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_HID",
> > >
> > > aml_eisaid("PNP0C31")));
> > > }
> > > + aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_UID", aml_int(1)));
> > why it's 1, and not 0 as in virt-arm?
>
> Marc-Andre and I looked at machines with hardware TPMs and that's what we
> found there as well, a '1'.
>
>
> >
> > > aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_STA", aml_int(0xF)));
> > > crs = aml_resource_template();
> > > @@ -1844,6 +1848,8 @@ build_dsdt(GArray *table_data, BIOSLinker *linker,
> > > if (TPM_IS_CRB(tpm)) {
> > > dev = aml_device("TPM");
> > > aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_HID", aml_string("MSFT0101")));
> > > + aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_STR",
> > > + aml_string("TPM 2.0 Device")));
> > > crs = aml_resource_template();
> > > aml_append(crs, aml_memory32_fixed(TPM_CRB_ADDR_BASE,
> > > TPM_CRB_ADDR_SIZE,
> > > AML_READ_WRITE));
> > > @@ -1851,6 +1857,8 @@ build_dsdt(GArray *table_data, BIOSLinker *linker,
> > > aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_STA", aml_int(0xf)));
> > >
> > no necessary ^^^ empty line
> fixed
> >
> > > + aml_append(dev, aml_name_decl("_UID", aml_int(1)));
> > > +
> > > tpm_build_ppi_acpi(tpm, dev);
> > > aml_append(sb_scope, dev);
>