From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=39931 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OPAyW-0006Do-AL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 05:01:29 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <gleb@redhat.com>) id 1OPAyV-0002x1-2A
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 05:01:28 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:38988)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <gleb@redhat.com>) id 1OPAyU-0002wt-Qc
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 05:01:27 -0400
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:01:24 +0300
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] hpet: Clean up initial hpet counter
Message-ID: <20100617090124.GN523@redhat.com>
References: <20100616153607.GG523@redhat.com> <4C18F538.1090709@web.de>
	<20100617054857.GH523@redhat.com> <4C19CC1F.9040209@web.de>
	<20100617080758.GK523@redhat.com> <4C19DD17.3000408@web.de>
	<20100617083616.GL523@redhat.com> <4C19DFFA.6000603@web.de>
	<20100617084639.GA31985@redhat.com> <4C19E3D5.9030406@web.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4C19E3D5.9030406@web.de>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/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: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>
Cc: qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:59:01AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:42:34AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 10:30:15AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>>>> Sorry, I lost you here. What "works for IO-based fw-cfg, but not for
> >>>>> MMIO-based".
> >>>> Undefined IO ports return -1, undefined (/wrt read access) MMIO 0. So
> >>>> you need to select a key that is different from both.
> >>>>
> >>> But can we rely on it? Is this defined somewhere or if it happens to be
> >>> the case in current qemu for x86 arch.
> >> For x86 with its port-based access, we are on the safe side as (pre-pnp)
> >> device probing used to work this way. Can't tell for the other archs
> >> that support fw-cfg.
> >>
> >>>>> Can you write pseudo logic of how you think it
> >>>>> all should work?
> >>>> The firmware should do this:
> >>>>
> >>>> write(CTL_BASE, FW_CFG_ID);
> >>>> if (read(CTL_BASE) != FW_CFG_ID)
> >>>> 	deal_with_old_qemu();
> >>>> else
> >>>> 	check_for_supported_keys();
> >>>>
> >>> Ah, I thought about read() returning 0/1, not key itself, so any key that
> >>> always existed would do.
> >> Yes, read-back would mean returning FWCfgState::cur_entry. And that will
> >> be -1 when selected an invalid one.
> >>
> > Heh, actually I have better idea. Why not advance FW_CFG_ID to version 2.
> 
> If that is supposed to be a version number - yeah, good idea.
> 
That was the idea behind it. I just forgot it exists.

--
			Gleb.