From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Mde Pkg: Support for MPAM ACPI Table To: Andrew Fish ,devel@edk2.groups.io From: hesham.almatary@huawei.com X-Originating-Location: London, England, GB (14.137.135.219) X-Originating-Platform: Windows Chrome 104 User-Agent: GROUPS.IO Web Poster MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2022 07:39:19 -0700 References: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <22413.1661351959791621929@groups.io> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="6Dn3L4WnP1EtBSNn5akv" --6Dn3L4WnP1EtBSNn5akv Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Rohit and Swatisri, On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 09:11 PM, Andrew Fish wrote: >=20 > [Rohit ] Shouldn't " Locator " field be 12 bytes in size, possibly a > separate type? (MPAM ACPI 1.0, section 2.2, table 7 - Resource node and > section 2.3.2 table 10 - locator descriptor) I'd just go for UINT64 locator1 and UINT32 locator2 and not necessarily a s= eparate type.=C2=A0The interpretation of each depends on the the locator ty= pe (e.g., MPAM ACPI Tables 11-15). --6Dn3L4WnP1EtBSNn5akv Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Rohit and Swatisri,
=
On Tue, Aug 23, 2022 at 09:11 PM, Andrew Fish wrote:
[= Rohit ] Shouldn't " Locator " field be 12 bytes in size, possibly a separat= e type? (MPAM ACPI 1.0, section 2.2, table 7 - Resource node and section 2.= 3.2 table 10 - locator descriptor)
I'd just go for UINT64 locator1 and UINT32 locator2 = and not necessarily a separate type. The interpretation of each depend= s on the the locator type (e.g., MPAM ACPI Tables 11-15).  --6Dn3L4WnP1EtBSNn5akv--