From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37281)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <benh@au1.ibm.com>) id 1XNAe5-0005nc-30
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 21:06:38 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <benh@au1.ibm.com>) id 1XNAdv-0007Ys-NN
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 21:06:29 -0400
Received: from e23smtp03.au.ibm.com ([202.81.31.145]:42392)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <benh@au1.ibm.com>) id 1XNAdv-0007YG-2G
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 21:06:19 -0400
Received: from /spool/local
	by e23smtp03.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use
	Only! Violators will be prosecuted
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org> from <benh@au1.ibm.com>;
	Fri, 29 Aug 2014 11:06:14 +1000
Message-ID: <1409274364.17335.28.camel@pasglop>
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@au1.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 11:06:04 +1000
In-Reply-To: <53FFCBEC.6030703@suse.de>
References: <20140825134353.2361.52046.stgit@aravindap>
	<20140825134516.2361.32987.stgit@aravindap> <53FF0732.6090008@suse.de>
	<53FF72DD.5010009@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <53FFAAC4.2050408@suse.de>
	<1409264725.17335.23.camel@pasglop> <53FFCBEC.6030703@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH 1/5] target-ppc: Extend rtas-blob
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
Cc: aik@au1.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, Aravinda Prasad <aravinda@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, paulus@samba.org

On Fri, 2014-08-29 at 02:40 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> 
> On 29.08.14 00:25, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> > On Fri, 2014-08-29 at 00:18 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >> I strongly disagree with David. Legally there is no difference between a
> >> .bin file that contains code and an array made of instructions. And the
> >> more target code we can keep outside of QEMU the better.
> > 
> > Ugh ... having a separate file with it's own build system etc... for 5
> > instructions is borderline ridiculous too :-)
> 
> Then don't use it - nobody's forcing you to do so :). Just use the
> provided binary. I fail to see the difference between
> 
>   uint32_t rtas_blob[] = { INST_SC1, INST_BLR };
> 
> and
> 
>   uint32_t *rtas_blob;
>   load_file_from_disk(rtas_blob);
> 
> except that we're using an actual assembler ;).

So you fail to see the difference with an array of 5 words vs. running
through thousands of instructions & syscall to read those same 5 words
from disk ? :-)

Cheers,
Ben.