From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:40369) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UXDLl-0000y4-2B for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 12:24:22 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UXDLf-0006az-HQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Apr 2013 12:24:16 -0400 Message-ID: <517FF00A.5040207@adacore.com> Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 18:23:38 +0200 From: Fabien Chouteau MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <517D2B5B.1020806@web.de> <1367334424-10656-1-git-send-email-chouteau@adacore.com> <517FE217.5000105@suse.de> <517FEA86.3040507@adacore.com> <517FEC00.7070506@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <517FEC00.7070506@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Fix PReP NIP reset value List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alexander Graf Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, blauwirbel@gmail.com, andreas.faerber@web.de, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, anthony@codemonkey.ws, aurelien@aurel32.net On 04/30/2013 06:06 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: > On 04/30/2013 06:00 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote: >> On 04/30/2013 05:24 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >>> On 04/30/2013 05:07 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote: >>>> The value was changed by the "PPC: fix hreset_vector..." patch. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Fabien Chouteau >>>> --- >>>> hw/ppc/prep.c | 3 +++ >>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/hw/ppc/prep.c b/hw/ppc/prep.c >>>> index cceab3e..2d0c4fe 100644 >>>> --- a/hw/ppc/prep.c >>>> +++ b/hw/ppc/prep.c >>>> @@ -427,6 +427,9 @@ static void ppc_prep_reset(void *opaque) >>>> PowerPCCPU *cpu = opaque; >>>> >>>> cpu_reset(CPU(cpu)); >>>> + >>>> + /* Reset address */ >>>> + cpu->env.nip = 0xfffffffc; >>> Why does PREP reset at this vector? Is it architected to that? Does 601 reset to that offset? >>> >> I don't know why PReP reset here. As I said in the hreset_vector patch, >> even if the core manual says that hreset is at 0xfff00100, the value is >> in fact board specific. OpenHackWare expects 0xfffffffc as reset >> address. > > Do you have 601e or 601 specs handy? Maybe they have a different reset vector. > None of the specs I have talk about 0xfffffffc... > Maybe OHW is also just wrong ;). > Maybe, but I have no way to prove it. -- Fabien Chouteau