Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v1 1/1] ShellPkg/UefiShellAcpiViewCommandLib: acpi version update for GTDT

["Gao, Zhichao" <zhichao.gao@intel.com>]

Agree with you, Leif. I assume the ACPI header file to keep the table signature to every version to indicate the supported table with specific ACPI version. That's my thought, maybe the maintainer can give a formal interpretation.
But there is not benefit to update it in the tool because the tool is not only support ACPI 6.3.
We can know such table is supported since the specific version of ACPI. But with this update, we loss the info.

Thanks,
Zhichao

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Leif Lindholm <leif@nuviainc.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 6:33 PM
> To: shashi.mallela@linaro.org
> Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io; Ni, Ray <ray.ni@intel.com>; Gao, Zhichao
> <zhichao.gao@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v1 1/1] ShellPkg/UefiShellAcpiViewCommandLib:
> acpi version update for GTDT
> 
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 11:27:45 -0700, shashi.mallela@linaro.org wrote:
> > Hi Lief,
> >
> > The macro has only been updated to reflect the latest ACPI version
> > 6.3 and stay in sync with the edk2-platform gtdt updates made for sbsa
> > platform
> >
> > based on the same ACPI version 6.3.
> 
> Which is based on 6.2, which is based on 6.1, which is based on 6.0 as per my
> previous email. There is no benefit to changing to a different macro that expands
> to exactly the same value.
> 
> Yes, it is a bit confusing that we apparently keep adding aliases for such basic
> things as signatures of standard tabled for each new release of ACPI, but it
> doesn't mean we have to add to the churn by changing unaffected code simply to
> "keep up".
> 
> This patch has no functional changes, and does not improve the code, so I would
> recommend the ShellPkg maintainers ignore it.
> 
> /
>     Leif