From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NwaKf-0007wB-NW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 08:14:09 -0400 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=36769 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NwaKe-0007w0-82 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 08:14:09 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NwaKd-0006Gx-5X for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 08:14:08 -0400 Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:22410) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NwaKd-0006Gt-0s for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 08:14:07 -0400 Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([38.113.113.100]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NwaKc-0003Uz-GM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2010 08:14:06 -0400 From: Paul Brook Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] GSoC projects about AHCI and S3 Trio Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 12:14:01 +0000 References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201003301314.03044.paul@codesourcery.com> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: Alexander Graf , Roland Elek > Hi Roland, > > On 30.03.2010, at 01:52, Roland Elek wrote: > > Dear Qemu developers, > > > > I am a university student from Hungary interested in contributing to Qemu > > through Google Summer of Code. I am interested in emulation, and two > > projects from the ideas page in particular. One of them is AHCI > > emulation. Can I kindly ask you what were the hardest points that made > > the project get a high difficulty rating, so that I could determine > > whether to apply for it or not? At a first glance, I think that AHCI code > > from VirtualBox OSE would be a good place to start. What do you think? > > I looked at the AHCI code from vbox some time ago and deemed it unreadable. > It's probably easier to go with the spec and implement it from there. I agree. IIRC the AHCI documentation is pretty good. The main reason I implemented the LSI SCSI HBA rather than AHCI was because at the time the SCSI HBA had much wider OS support. Paul