Type 43 through type 46 entry types are missing from the
definitions in the dmi_entry_type enum.

Link: https://www.dmtf.org/sites/default/files/standards/documents/DSP0134_3.7.1.pdf
Suggested-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
Reviewed-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de>
Reviewed-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello (AMD) <superm1@kernel.org>
---
v4:
 * Add tag (Yazen)
 * Correct text (Yazen)
v3:
 * Add tag (Jean)
---
 include/linux/dmi.h | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/include/linux/dmi.h b/include/linux/dmi.h
index 32b2529a73301..2eedf44e68012 100644
--- a/include/linux/dmi.h
+++ b/include/linux/dmi.h
@@ -70,6 +70,10 @@ enum dmi_entry_type {
 	DMI_ENTRY_ADDITIONAL,
 	DMI_ENTRY_ONBOARD_DEV_EXT,
 	DMI_ENTRY_MGMT_CONTROLLER_HOST,
+	DMI_ENTRY_TPM_DEVICE,
+	DMI_ENTRY_PROCESSOR_ADDITIONAL,
+	DMI_ENTRY_FIRMWARE_INVENTORY,
+	DMI_ENTRY_STRING_PROPERTY,
 	DMI_ENTRY_INACTIVE = 126,
 	DMI_ENTRY_END_OF_TABLE = 127,
 };
-- 
2.43.0

On Sat, Mar 07, 2026 at 08:10:22AM -0600, Mario Limonciello (AMD) wrote:
> Type 43 through type 46 entry types are missing from the
> definitions in the dmi_entry_type enum.
> 
> Link: https://www.dmtf.org/sites/default/files/standards/documents/DSP0134_3.7.1.pdf
> Suggested-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de>
> Reviewed-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
> Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello (AMD) <superm1@kernel.org>
> ---
> v4:
>  * Add tag (Yazen)
>  * Correct text (Yazen)
> v3:
>  * Add tag (Jean)
> ---
>  include/linux/dmi.h | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/dmi.h b/include/linux/dmi.h
> index 32b2529a73301..2eedf44e68012 100644
> --- a/include/linux/dmi.h
> +++ b/include/linux/dmi.h
> @@ -70,6 +70,10 @@ enum dmi_entry_type {
>  	DMI_ENTRY_ADDITIONAL,
>  	DMI_ENTRY_ONBOARD_DEV_EXT,
>  	DMI_ENTRY_MGMT_CONTROLLER_HOST,
> +	DMI_ENTRY_TPM_DEVICE,
> +	DMI_ENTRY_PROCESSOR_ADDITIONAL,
> +	DMI_ENTRY_FIRMWARE_INVENTORY,
> +	DMI_ENTRY_STRING_PROPERTY,
>  	DMI_ENTRY_INACTIVE = 126,
>  	DMI_ENTRY_END_OF_TABLE = 127,
>  };
> -- 

Is there any particular reason this is a separate patch and not part of patch
1?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette

On 4/1/26 06:03, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 07, 2026 at 08:10:22AM -0600, Mario Limonciello (AMD) wrote:
>> Type 43 through type 46 entry types are missing from the
>> definitions in the dmi_entry_type enum.
>>
>> Link: https://www.dmtf.org/sites/default/files/standards/documents/DSP0134_3.7.1.pdf
>> Suggested-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de>
>> Reviewed-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello (AMD) <superm1@kernel.org>
>> ---
>> v4:
>>   * Add tag (Yazen)
>>   * Correct text (Yazen)
>> v3:
>>   * Add tag (Jean)
>> ---
>>   include/linux/dmi.h | 4 ++++
>>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/dmi.h b/include/linux/dmi.h
>> index 32b2529a73301..2eedf44e68012 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/dmi.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/dmi.h
>> @@ -70,6 +70,10 @@ enum dmi_entry_type {
>>   	DMI_ENTRY_ADDITIONAL,
>>   	DMI_ENTRY_ONBOARD_DEV_EXT,
>>   	DMI_ENTRY_MGMT_CONTROLLER_HOST,
>> +	DMI_ENTRY_TPM_DEVICE,
>> +	DMI_ENTRY_PROCESSOR_ADDITIONAL,
>> +	DMI_ENTRY_FIRMWARE_INVENTORY,
>> +	DMI_ENTRY_STRING_PROPERTY,
>>   	DMI_ENTRY_INACTIVE = 126,
>>   	DMI_ENTRY_END_OF_TABLE = 127,
>>   };
>> -- 
> 
> Is there any particular reason this is a separate patch and not part of patch
> 1?
> 

They are two separate logical problems (indexing error and missing 
entries).  I was trying to stick to one commit; one issue.

On Wed, Apr 01, 2026 at 08:16:17AM -0500, Mario Limonciello (AMD) wrote:
> They are two separate logical problems (indexing error and missing entries).
> I was trying to stick to one commit; one issue.

Right, but they're touching the same place, both are very related and there
sometimes really is the thing about too many patches if you consider the
effort distros have to do each time they up-rev the kernel.

Long story short, I'll merge it into patch 1 - it is easier for everybody
involved.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette