[PATCH v2 12/39] dm: core: Add basic ACPI support

[Simon Glass]

Hi Andy,

On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 at 08:46, Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko at linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Mar 08, 2020 at 09:44:36PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
> > ACPI (Advanced Configuration and Power Interface) is an Intel standard
>
> Not Intel for a long time. Or more precisely, not *only* Intel.
>
> Also this should be corrected (I guess dropping Intel would work) everywhere in
> this series.

OK will do.

>
> > for specifying information about a platform.
>
> > It is a little like device
> > tree but considerably more complicated and with more backslashes.
>
> For what purpose this passage?
> Isn't the same reason why ARM64 choose ACPI to be supported for servers?
>
> > A
> > primary difference is that it supports an interpreted bytecode language.
> >
> > Driver model does not use ACPI for U-Boot's configuration, but it is
> > convenient to have it support generation of ACPI tables for passing to
> > Linux, etc.
> >
> > As a starting point, add an optional set of ACPI operations to each
> > device. Initially only a single operation is available, to obtain the
> > ACPI name for the device. More operations are added later.
> >
> > Enable ACPI for sandbox to ensure build coverage and so that we can add
> > tests.
>
> ...
>
> > +/* Length of an ACPI name string, excluding nul terminator */
> > +#define ACPI_NAME_LEN        4
> > +
> > +/* Length of an ACPI name string including nul terminator */
> > +#define ACPI_NAME_MAX        5
>
> Do we really need two definitions?

It is annoying to have to use

char name[ACPI_NAME_LEN + 1]

everywhere.

On the other hand, some structs don't need a terminator, so we need
ACPI_NAME_LEN.

I'll change it so one is computed from the other.

>
> ...
>
> > +     /* Intel Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) */
>
> Same as above for commit message.
>

Regards,
Simon