From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:45607) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QcgTR-0005ME-Fi for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 12:21:46 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QcgTP-0003AJ-AI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 12:21:44 -0400 Received: from mel.act-europe.fr ([194.98.77.210]:38812) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QcgTO-00039O-Pt for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2011 12:21:43 -0400 Message-ID: <4E0DF412.5000802@adacore.com> Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 18:21:38 +0200 From: Fabien Chouteau MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1309180555-3942-1-git-send-email-chouteau@adacore.com> <20110627112807.22346e82@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net> <4E098E23.3040605@adacore.com> <20110628112008.31cf6237@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net> <4E0C32FB.40302@adacore.com> <20110630111745.7c544a06@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net> <86AF921C-3FD1-409A-ACFD-EEEA23BBE130@suse.de> <20110630164630.2bd57166@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net> <10F3D94F-5B79-4041-BFE7-58681B7E89CB@suse.de> <20110630171147.76eef3fc@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net> <9B335790-A8DA-4545-8746-F66B1B258FBF@suse.de> <20110630172345.36994f31@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net> <20110630173211.33924c99@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net> <4E0DE0C3.1030906@adacore.com> <4E0DEA45.1020607@adacore.com> <20110701110038.05eeb4da@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net> In-Reply-To: <20110701110038.05eeb4da@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Add e500 instructions dcblc, dcbtls and dcbtstl as no-op List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Scott Wood Cc: Alexander Graf , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 01/07/2011 18:00, Scott Wood wrote: > On Fri, 1 Jul 2011 17:39:49 +0200 > Fabien Chouteau wrote: > >> No, I just implemented these no-oped instructions to get rid of an illegal >> instruction exception while running u-boot on my emulated p2010. >> > > Heh, so someone *is* trying to run firmware. :-) > > It would take a lot of low-level hardware simulation to get unmodified > U-Boot to run -- probably not worth it unless your goal is an environment > for debugging U-Boot. > > It uses cache locking to create working space before the memory controller > is initialized, so it's really expecting those instructions to work. It was mainly to test the correctness of emulation, but it appears that I have to implement more devices (eSPI, I2C, LBC...) than I initially thought. -- Fabien Chouteau