From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60719) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gHFqW-00013a-AE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 18:17:17 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gHFqS-00071i-4R for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 18:17:16 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-f67.google.com ([209.85.128.67]:40895) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gHFqR-00071B-S7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 18:17:12 -0400 Received: by mail-wm1-f67.google.com with SMTP id b203-v6so9513401wme.5 for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 15:17:11 -0700 (PDT) References: <1540548409-22560-1-git-send-email-thuth@redhat.com> <7fc49925-36ff-bd9a-0cd7-e5f8d4bb3672@roeck-us.net> <2eb2b4ef-725d-cbee-1676-feb6bd800aea@redhat.com> <20181029202450.GB24689@roeck-us.net> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Philippe_Mathieu-Daud=c3=a9?= Message-ID: <034785b2-0126-e480-2f3f-2295152b11ae@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 23:17:06 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20181029202450.GB24689@roeck-us.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate the "collie" machine and Strongarm devices List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Peter Maydell , Thomas Huth , qemu-arm , QEMU Developers , Markus Armbruster On 29/10/18 21:24, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 04:03:40PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >> On 29/10/18 15:09, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>> On 10/29/18 6:24 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: >>>> On 27 October 2018 at 12:04, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>>>> On 10/26/18 3:12 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: >>>>>> Hi Guenter; there's a proposal here to deprecate (and eventually >>>>>> remove) the 'collie' board (strongarm) from QEMU. Is that one of >>>>>> the ones you're currently using in your automated testing of Linux >>>>>> kernels on QEMU? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes. I can run the test with older versions of qemu, so it is ok for me >>>>> if it is removed (as long as that removal is not backported). [...] >>> Though not all of them are supported by upstream qemu. For some of them I >>> carry local patches, >>> for others I use out-of-tree versions of qemu (beagle/beaglexm). >> >> Are these patches upstream-able? >> > > Some of the patches (eg to be able to boot a Linux kernel image for mps2-an385 > directly from qemu, or zynq CPU clock rate changes to be able to do the same) > have been rejected. A few patches were submitted at some point but got lost. > I don't keep track, so I don't know the exact number. For some patches, such > as basic BCM283x CPRMAN support (needed to boot raspi2), a better > implementation was suggested, but didn't go anywhere as far as I know. > > Some machines, such as beagle support, are from Linaro's tree and were never > upstreamed by Linaro. The Linaro branch is based off qemu 2.3, so applying > the changes to upstream qemu would be a major effort. I also use the m68k > branch from github.com:vivier/qemu-m68k.git for m68k tests. > > I carry some 20+ patches locally in my qemu tree. Some may be obsolete or > not or no longer needed (my understanding of qemu is evolving). Sometimes, > if and when I find the time, I pick some and try to upstream, but I often > don't follow up if there is no response or if the requested changes are > too substantial. > > Please feel free to have a look at https://github.com/groeck/qemu > (check the -local branches) and let me know what might be > upstreamable. I'll be happy to (re-)submit the respective patches. > Note that I won't be able to make any substantial changes, though. > Time is a scarce commodity nowadays, unfortunately. Thank you for pointing your work, I'll try to salvage what I can. Regards, Phil.