Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] BCM2837 and machine raspi3

[bzt bzt <bztemail@gmail.com>]

Hi Andrew!

[...]

>
> In that case, IIRC my high-level suggestion was to either parameterise
> bcm2836 to take a CPU model string, or else move the CPU creation out of
> bcm2836.c into the board file. From what I've understood thus far about
> pi3, it does not seem necessary to have a separate bcm2837 implementation.
> I suspect at that point the patch would be small enough that it didn't
> require further splitting.
>

Yes, I agree. I've provided a parameterised version on Oct 24, which does
not have a separate bcm2837 implementation. Is that patch ok? Or should I
wait for Alistair's patch (
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2017-10/msg04153.html)?
I would prefer the latter, if I may, and I'm willing to rewrite raspi3
support using the CPU model string in mc->default_cpu_type introduced by
that patch. (Although I have a question. I'm not sure what's the preferred
way to get MachineClass* object in bcm2836. Use a MachineState* cast on
it's Object* argument with MACHINE_GET_CLASS() or should I use the
parameterless qdev_get_machine() instead?)


> > PS: if you send a new patch, send it as a new top level
> > thread -- if you send it as a reply/followup to the
> > first patch it's liable to not be noticed.
>
> Please also CC me on the new patch as I am not very reliable at monitoring
> qemu-devel.
>

Noted :-) Thank you for your help! I'm sure qemu users appreciate it very
much!

bzt


>
> Thanks!
> Andrew
>