Re: [PATCH 4/5] docs/system/target-sparc: Improve the Sparc documentation

[Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>]

On 18/04/2024 22.27, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
> On 07/03/2024 17:43, Thomas Huth wrote:
> 
>> Add some words about how to enable or disable boolean features,
>> and remove the note about a Linux kernel being available on the
>> QEMU website (they have been removed long ago already).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>   docs/system/target-sparc.rst | 8 ++++++--
>>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/docs/system/target-sparc.rst b/docs/system/target-sparc.rst
>> index 9ec8c90c14..9f418b9d3e 100644
>> --- a/docs/system/target-sparc.rst
>> +++ b/docs/system/target-sparc.rst
>> @@ -27,6 +27,11 @@ architecture machines:
>>   The emulation is somewhat complete. SMP up to 16 CPUs is supported, but
>>   Linux limits the number of usable CPUs to 4.
>> +The list of available CPUs can be viewed by starting QEMU with ``-cpu 
>> help``.
>> +Optional boolean features can be added with a "+" in front of the feature 
>> name,
>> +or disabled with a "-" in front of the name, for example
>> +``-cpu TI-SuperSparc-II,+float128``.
>> +
>>   QEMU emulates the following sun4m peripherals:
>>   -  IOMMU
>> @@ -55,8 +60,7 @@ OpenBIOS is a free (GPL v2) portable firmware 
>> implementation. The goal
>>   is to implement a 100% IEEE 1275-1994 (referred to as Open Firmware)
>>   compliant firmware.
>> -A sample Linux 2.6 series kernel and ram disk image are available on the
>> -QEMU web site. There are still issues with NetBSD and OpenBSD, but most
>> +There are still issues with NetBSD and OpenBSD, but most
>>   kernel versions work. Please note that currently older Solaris kernels
>>   don't work probably due to interface issues between OpenBIOS and
>>   Solaris.
> 
> Just curious as to what current issues exist with NetBSD and OpenBSD? At 
> least both my NetBSD and OpenBSD test images survive a casual boot test here 
> with latest git.

Maybe it's also about a long fixed bug ... shall I remove that sentence 
while I'm at it?

  Thomas