From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NCE5f-0008C4-W6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 22 Nov 2009 10:11:04 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NCE5b-0008BH-9g for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 22 Nov 2009 10:11:03 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=42778 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NCE5b-0008BE-7o for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 22 Nov 2009 10:10:59 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46853) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NCE5a-0003GW-PA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 22 Nov 2009 10:10:59 -0500 Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2009 17:10:53 +0200 From: Gleb Natapov Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: POST failure (loop) with isapc and seabios Message-ID: <20091122151052.GK3193@redhat.com> References: <20091120225113.GD24539@morn.localdomain> <20091122123503.GH3193@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Sebastian Herbszt Cc: Kevin O'Connor , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Sun, Nov 22, 2009 at 04:07:56PM +0100, Sebastian Herbszt wrote: > Gleb Natapov wrote: > >On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 05:51:13PM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote: > >>On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 10:30:20PM +0100, Sebastian Herbszt wrote: > >>> i386-softmmu/qemu -M isapc -bios pc-bios/bios.bin > >> > >>Thanks for reporting this. > >> > >>After compiling seabios with CONFIG_DEBUG_SERIAL set in src/config.h > >>and running: > >> > >>qemu -M isapc -serial file:foo > >> > >>I see: > >> > >>Unable to unlock ram - bridge not found > >> > >>SeaBIOS stores global variables in the f-segment. This greatly > >>simplifies the code, but it does require the ability to write to the > >>f-segment. Since the f-segment can't be unlocked in "isapc" mode, the > >>boot fails. > >> > >>I'm not really sure what to do about this. Maybe some kind of non-pci > >>method of unlocking the f-segment could be implemented. > >> > >>Anthony, what do you think? > >> > >May be make qemu to map it writable if isapc is specified. > > I don't think keeping the segment writable after POST is a good idea. > Isn't it writable now after POST with pcipc? Why this is not a good idea? -- Gleb.