From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 315E8C3F68F for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 17:20:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00D6621582 for ; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 17:20:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="Lej4VOaX" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 00D6621582 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:43360 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1in48m-0008NO-7I for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Thu, 02 Jan 2020 12:20:08 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35195) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1in48A-0007pS-H4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 Jan 2020 12:19:31 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1in488-0003Gy-67 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 Jan 2020 12:19:30 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.120]:57144 helo=us-smtp-1.mimecast.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1in488-0003GW-2D for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 Jan 2020 12:19:28 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1577985567; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=qZA50ucQvHvGszmyxuzHR3QW3+N0qNrjv2H4UNxa7M4=; b=Lej4VOaXK6AhHFfkptBAFA+BAbcrz0MT+Wqe+iesBLM6alHJTbiO1f1rmg5C6Cdv6P80ho B3JYQEeAejxQse5omzmZj/PnyMpmoWKZgTD2tnJjusZ9GP+ZegdWufDyzIblMI7MkMD6P2 hAlWV31ytQJvW5QPReGMFPa6B1bnOcM= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-436-R3R79ghNOwyMhAfz6o66kw-1; Thu, 02 Jan 2020 12:19:26 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4755C107ACC4; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 17:19:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.43.2.114]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A01AA4B60; Thu, 2 Jan 2020 17:19:24 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 2020 18:19:22 +0100 From: Igor Mammedov To: BALATON Zoltan Subject: Re: [PATCH 66/86] ppc:ppc440_bamboo/sam460ex: drop RAM size fixup Message-ID: <20200102181922.771b76b9@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: References: <1577797450-88458-1-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <1577797450-88458-67-git-send-email-imammedo@redhat.com> <20200102124749.03a0368d@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 X-MC-Unique: R3R79ghNOwyMhAfz6o66kw-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 205.139.110.120 X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Thu, 2 Jan 2020 16:52:50 +0100 (CET) BALATON Zoltan wrote: > On Thu, 2 Jan 2020, Igor Mammedov wrote: > > On Wed, 1 Jan 2020 12:54:37 +0100 (CET) > > BALATON Zoltan wrote: > >> On Tue, 31 Dec 2019, Igor Mammedov wrote: > >>> If user provided non-sense RAM size, board will complain and > >>> continue running with max RAM size supported. > >>> Also RAM is going to be allocated by generic code, so it won't be > >>> possible for board to fix things up for user. > >>> > >>> Make it error message and exit to force user fix CLI, > >>> instead of accepting non-sense CLI values. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov > >>> --- > >>> include/hw/ppc/ppc4xx.h | 9 ++++----- > >>> hw/ppc/ppc440_bamboo.c | 11 ++++------- > >>> hw/ppc/ppc4xx_devs.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++---------- > >>> hw/ppc/sam460ex.c | 5 ++--- > >>> 4 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/include/hw/ppc/ppc4xx.h b/include/hw/ppc/ppc4xx.h > >>> index 7d82259..1a28127 100644 > >>> --- a/include/hw/ppc/ppc4xx.h > >>> +++ b/include/hw/ppc/ppc4xx.h > >>> @@ -42,11 +42,10 @@ enum { > >>> qemu_irq *ppcuic_init (CPUPPCState *env, qemu_irq *irqs, > >>> uint32_t dcr_base, int has_ssr, int has_vr); > >>> > >>> -ram_addr_t ppc4xx_sdram_adjust(ram_addr_t ram_size, int nr_banks, > >>> - MemoryRegion ram_memories[], > >>> - hwaddr ram_bases[], > >>> - hwaddr ram_sizes[], > >>> - const ram_addr_t sdram_bank_sizes[]); > >>> +void ppc4xx_sdram_adjust(ram_addr_t ram_size, int nr_banks, > >>> + MemoryRegion ram_memories[], > >>> + hwaddr ram_bases[], hwaddr ram_sizes[], > >>> + const ram_addr_t sdram_bank_sizes[]); > >> > >> With this change this function does not adjust ram size any more so it may > >> need to be renamed, e.g. ppc4xx_sdram_banks or something else. > >> > >> A better patch title may be > >> > >> ppc/{ppc440_bamboo,sam460x}: drop RAM size fixup > >> > >> (or without curly braces at your preference). > > I'll rename and use this subj as you suggest on v2. > > > >> This is inconvenient for the user because it worked whatever number > >> they've given but now they have to do the math. So it suggests that what > >> you're replacing this with may not support all the existing use cases. If > >> that can't be fixed to allow checking and changing ram size (maybe via a > >> callback in board code similar to above adjust function returning adjusted > >> size) it may be OK to drop this convenience for the sake of cleaning up > >> code elsewhere. > > > > There were few boards that did fix up and in all cases it was to cover up > > invalid CLI input. > > Creating callback for fixing user mistake doesn't seems to me justified, > > I'd much prefer to have a hard error and consistent behavior across all > > the boards versus being lax on error checking. > > > > [...] > > > > > >>> @@ -699,10 +698,19 @@ ram_addr_t ppc4xx_sdram_adjust(ram_addr_t ram_size, int nr_banks, > >>> } > >>> } > >>> > >>> - ram_size -= size_left; > >>> if (size_left) { > >>> - error_report("Truncating memory to %" PRId64 " MiB to fit SDRAM" > >>> - " controller limits", ram_size / MiB); > >>> + char *s = g_strdup(""); > >>> + for (i = 0; sdram_bank_sizes[i]; i++) { > >>> + char *t = g_strdup_printf("%s%" PRIi64 "%s", s, sdram_bank_sizes[i], > >>> + sdram_bank_sizes[i + 1] ? " ," : ""); > >>> + g_free(s); > >>> + s = t; > >>> + } > >>> + error_report("Invalid RAM size, unable to fit all RAM into RAM banks" > >>> + " (unassigned RAM: %" PRIi64 ")", size_left); > >>> + error_report("Supported: %d banks and sizes/bank: %s", nr_banks, s); > > > > Do you have any suggestions how to make error message better? > > (maybe do calculation here and dump all valid -m variants instead of "#bank,size/bank") > > Listing the valid values would certainly help users who don't know what > the constraints of the SoC or SPD ROMs are (which I think most users don't > have a clue about and we should not expect them to know). I've also seen ok, I'll go ahead with it. > similar concerns in another response for hppa machines so maybe having a > callback to allow adjusting user input to board constraints is not a bad > idea. It's not lax error checking but convenience for the average user > where board has specific constraints and cannot handle any mem size. It could be usefull to generalize and probably introspect valid/supported RAM sizes but I doubt it would be easy to sell a callback for fixing up invalid user input vs just a hard error. Anyways it looks out of scope of this series and could be done on top if there is demand for that. > Regards, > BALATON Zoltan >