On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 22:05:41 -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
Put this table before MCFG so that it matches the order that coreboot uses when passing tables to Linux. This is a cosmetic change since the order of the tables does not otherwise matter.
The patch looks like it's doing the opposite of what the commit message says. Rebasing issue, or am I being daft? (If this is a stack operation, use of stack terminology in the commit message would be more daft-friendly.)
/ Leif
Signed-off-by: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org
arch/x86/lib/acpi_table.c | 12 ++++++------ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/acpi_table.c b/arch/x86/lib/acpi_table.c index 83b92e2a4c..694e92c158 100644 --- a/arch/x86/lib/acpi_table.c +++ b/arch/x86/lib/acpi_table.c @@ -408,18 +408,18 @@ ulong write_acpi_tables(ulong start_addr) acpi_create_fadt(fadt, facs, dsdt); acpi_add_table(ctx, fadt);
- debug("ACPI: * MADT\n");
- madt = ctx->current;
- acpi_create_madt(madt);
- acpi_inc_align(ctx, madt->header.length);
- acpi_add_table(ctx, madt);
- debug("ACPI: * MCFG\n"); mcfg = ctx->current; acpi_create_mcfg(mcfg); acpi_inc_align(ctx, mcfg->header.length); acpi_add_table(ctx, mcfg);
- debug("ACPI: * MADT\n");
- madt = ctx->current;
- acpi_create_madt(madt);
- acpi_inc_align(ctx, madt->header.length);
- acpi_add_table(ctx, madt);
- debug("ACPI: * CSRT\n"); csrt = ctx->current; acpi_create_csrt(csrt);
-- 2.25.0.341.g760bfbb309-goog