Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC][PATCH 000/111] QEMU m68k core additions

[Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>]

On 08/19/2011 03:08 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 08/19/2011 11:07 AM, Laurent Vivier wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Le 19 août 2011 à 17:52, Natalia Portillo<claunia@claunia.com>  a écrit :
>>
>>>
>>> El 19/08/2011, a las 09:55, François Revol escribió:
>> [snip]
>>>> Release early, release often :p
>>>
>>> +1Ok, Ok, I think all m68k core can be submitted except some bitfield
>>> operations and fpu instructions.
>>
>> Just need to know how Anthony and Paul want I proceed...
> 
> Well let's step back here for a minute.
> 
> The most important problem to solve is for someone to maintain whatever
> is in the tree consistently (and incrementally) improving what we have.

I dunno about maintain and improve, but if an m68k board emulation
starts working I can regression test it against Linux system images and
make puppy eyes at people when it breaks.  (Plus the occasional monkey
patch offering The Wrong Fix to motivate people. :)

> Laurent, if you want to take over m68k and Paul doesn't object, I'm all
> for it.  But that doesn't mean that I want to see 400 commits of stuff
> that only half works.  I'd like to see a systematic approach to either
> picking a platform and making it robust or fixing what's there already.

I would very much like something capable of booting m68k Linux,
specifically
http://landley.net/aboriginal/downloads/binaries/old/1.0.1/system-image-m68k.tar.bz2

(The kernel in that tarball is randomish, I think some defconfig for
atari, but the root filesystem was tested under ananym and worked.)

I'm in the process of building a Linux 3.0, uClibc 0.9.32, busybox
1.19.0 variant which should be ready tomorrow-ish, if that would be a
better testing base.  I'm probably basing it on the atari_defconfig in
the 3.0 kernel unless somebody has a better idea.  (In case I need to
fish out aranym again.)

Rob