Re: [PATCH 0/7] hw/mips/malta: Rework to allow more than 2GB of RAM on 64-bit

["Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <f4bug@amsat.org>]

On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:52 PM Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> wrote:
>
> On 6/30/20 12:48 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote:
> >
> >
> > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org
> > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> је написао/ла:
> >
> >     Hi,
> >
> >     Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion:
> >     https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/
> >     <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>
> >
> >     - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping 'malta' aliased)
> >       Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe 'malta-unreal' or
> >       'malta-unleashed' instead?
> >     - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware restrictions (on RAM so far)
> >     - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on 64-bit
> >
> >     Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7):
> >       hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement
> >       hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo
> >       hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as 'malta-virt'
> >       hw/mips/malta: Introduce MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize
> >       hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine
> >       hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses correct DIMM sizes
> >       hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit malta-virt
> >
> >      hw/mips/malta.c | 121 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> >      1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> >
> >     --
> >
> >
> >
> > Thank you, Philippe, for providing this series.
> >
> > However, in previous discussion on the patch you mention above, I
> > already expressed serious reservations on the approach taken in that
> > patch. These reservations stay today too.
> >
> > There is nothing qualitatively different between the original patch and
> > this series. Naming and related stuff are just cosmetic issues.
>
> OK, what about considering all patches except the last one?
> So we can run firmware on a real Malta board, not the QEMU
> imaginary one (in the discussion you said QEMU should respect
> real hardware, which I agree).
>
> >
> > The good thing about this series is that one can apply it dowstream, if
> > one finds it useful. However, it is not suitable for upstreaming

IOW, what is missing to have this series (except the last patch)
accepted upstream?

> >
> > Regards,
> > Aleksandar
> >
> >
> >
> >     2.21.3
> >