From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LPiYZ-00023A-9K for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:16:07 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LPiYX-00022E-E7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:16:06 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=46927 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LPiYX-000227-5H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:16:05 -0500 Received: from 2.mail-out.ovh.net ([91.121.26.226]:56103) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LPiYW-0001nw-QJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:16:05 -0500 Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 20:01:35 +0100 From: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] sh: SE7750 board definition Message-ID: <20090121190135.GF5147@game.jcrosoft.org> References: <4969B77E.7050206@juno.dti.ne.jp> <20090111130445.GA12080@game.jcrosoft.org> <496ABD72.20400@juno.dti.ne.jp> <20090112124949.GA14269@linux-sh.org> <496BFD30.30306@renesas.com> <496C98EB.5040309@juno.dti.ne.jp> <20090121090424.GC14537@linux-sh.org> <4977527A.70104@juno.dti.ne.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4977527A.70104@juno.dti.ne.jp> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Shin-ichiro KAWASAKI Cc: Takashi Yoshii , Nobuhiro Iwamatsu , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "linux-sh@vger.kernel.org" >> I also don't see much point in catering to OSes that don't support >> hardware manufactured this century. If the TOPPERS and BSD people want to >> toy around with legacy support, they are welcome to, but QEMU certainly >> doesn't have much to gain by spending time on this. > I've just heard that newest TOPPERS (TOPPERS/ASP) supports SH-4A. > > > Now, I hope that we would reach a consensus about the spec of new standard board > for SH-4A. SH7785LCR is a choice. And, as Iwamatsu-san suggested, a virtual > generic board is another choice. I'm not sure SH7785LCR's hardware spec is available > or not. (Does anyone know it?) If it is, I push SH7785LCR. Otherwise, virtual board > sounds good. The SH7785LCR is a good choice for the SH-4A The RSK7203 will be a good choice for the SH-2A The virtual board will be a good choice for IP test and integration test Best Regards, J.