From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40874) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XN3KZ-0003iy-T2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 13:18:00 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XN3KQ-0001Tk-RT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 13:17:51 -0400 Received: from e32.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.150]:43047) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XN3KQ-0001Sj-Jd for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 13:17:42 -0400 Received: from /spool/local by e32.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 11:17:41 -0600 Message-ID: <53FF642E.5070205@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 22:47:34 +0530 From: Aravinda Prasad MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20140825134353.2361.52046.stgit@aravindap> <20140825134535.2361.37728.stgit@aravindap> <53FDA9EB.5010301@suse.de> <53FEC868.9060009@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <53FEEA0A.4060204@suse.de> <1409221308.25772.194.camel@pasglop> <53FF0483.3060806@suse.de> <1409221991.25772.198.camel@pasglop> In-Reply-To: <1409221991.25772.198.camel@pasglop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH 3/5] target-ppc: Build error log List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Cc: aik@au1.ibm.com, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, Alexander Graf , paulus@samba.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Thursday 28 August 2014 04:03 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Thu, 2014-08-28 at 12:29 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: >> >> On 28.08.14 12:21, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >>> On Thu, 2014-08-28 at 10:36 +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: >>> >>>> So why not put it at 0x7000 then? >>> >>> Because PAPR says it has to be inside RTAS iirc >> >> Please show me the section of PAPR that does say so. > > Actually, we should probably support both options: > > PAPR V2.7 > > 7.3.14 Firmware Assisted Non-Maskable Interrupts Option (FWNMI) > > << > The difference between ibm,nmi-register and ibm,nmi-register-2 is that > ibm,nmi-register allocates the error reporting > structure in RTAS space while ibm,nmi-register-2 places the error > reporting structure in real page 7. New OS designs > should use ibm,nmi-register since support for ibm,nmi-register-2 will be > terminated at some future date. Should we avoid having error log in 0x7000? As per above only ibm,nmi-register-2 places error log in 0x7000 which will be terminated in future? >>> > > Cheers, > Ben. > > > -- Regards, Aravinda