From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59092) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XNDvC-0005oS-4Y for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 00:36:26 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XNDv8-0001sW-7I for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 00:36:22 -0400 Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 13:47:21 +1000 From: David Gibson Message-ID: <20140829034721.GE1930@voom.redhat.com> 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> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="VUDLurXRWRKrGuMn" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53FFAAC4.2050408@suse.de> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH 1/5] target-ppc: Extend rtas-blob List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alexander Graf Cc: benh@au1.ibm.com, aik@au1.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, Aravinda Prasad , paulus@samba.org --VUDLurXRWRKrGuMn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 12:18:44AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: >=20 >=20 > On 28.08.14 20:20, Aravinda Prasad wrote: > >=20 > >=20 > > On Thursday 28 August 2014 04:10 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 25.08.14 15:45, Aravinda Prasad wrote: > >>> Extend rtas-blob to accommodate error log. Error log > >>> structure is saved in rtas space upon a machine check > >>> exception. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Aravinda Prasad > >> > >> I can't say I'm a big fan of this patch. Can we somehow separate that > >> NMI page from the RTAS blob? Also I'd definitely prefer if we keep > >> rtas_entry =3D=3D rtas_addr - if nothing else for the sake of backwards > >> compatibility. > >> > >> So how about we lay out the structure in memory like this: > >> > >> [ spapr-rtas.bin ] > >> [ padding to 4k boundary or whatever sPAPR requires ] > >> [ 4k NMI region ] > >> > >> Then the only thing we'd have to really change internally is the size > >> information of the rtas blob. > >=20 > > Either we can have it like this or completely eliminate spapr-rtas.bin > > (and spapr-rtas.S) by simply allocating required space in QEMU and then > > patching the 5 instructions at rtas-entry as earlier discussed with Dav= id. > >=20 > > http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2014-08/msg00251.html > >=20 >=20 > 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. What do legalities have to do with it? --=20 David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson --VUDLurXRWRKrGuMn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJT//fJAAoJEGw4ysog2bOSyVwQAMkN+EVcNjXg9q6lUYqJoNL8 4YPJ3k2Ukql3/o6xUYjfVsPh++3bdGzwkhHnYzLl8f87wX3ct8TI4sdlaVZRZh/U bRh3IPgq1DKLbsoBa7gjcdjTtvenH/DPxn+rEuG2eh1/O2Hz+FzEwgbiMjqlv2un CMxfS1IlxsppofkwtAijlEKMxTtyL10NOktZOjz2JxC7KPs6ZCeTu+nmTmYGB4Ta y4HjE+OnJy59ltljhzGfUge26aCxkouS8cHVfOMAMNNZFVclm11WmsIbwWMyqmtr aK0Uooape5tC9lqehauQ79DgX5CO90Ae1q4EbURvkBpQYlhbPARYhiNk6IHf5fW1 RjG1j/Dbre0dOCOFRT7yShanXOjXTfwJ7eZCz125hymPBMxPYgY2gSBZVFR72vTk GBJGs0AlVfOfbXCEmHFI/+PABsLxb1Rf7HG0F3PPR+IHz07DF70AmBuBbStwGRCb YoCbD7JJGqNWEZQsas2egvmz/2TCGK4mXxUNINp4Ah829vpE1G/CPUdefM+MbhVv VWAMwm5y/72UeDfzw3iqgNv8d0IikkcsGBpn9lDlokAQt7x/yc2l11R9qEF2UmCe gjAKx0GhzcSJV5aid3jIuxKYElE/sGVTces0Km8FFP91P1aosG/8EjnG5N/S0PjP PU8MvXcKD0Zj9GixY7r3 =1qVP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --VUDLurXRWRKrGuMn--