From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:41712) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h29rb-0002Bq-19 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2019 02:24:15 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h29ra-00053H-7o for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Mar 2019 02:24:15 -0500 From: Markus Armbruster References: <20190307130323.9353-1-armbru@redhat.com> <20190307130323.9353-8-armbru@redhat.com> <20190308001032.GF7722@umbus.fritz.box> Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2019 08:24:04 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20190308001032.GF7722@umbus.fritz.box> (David Gibson's message of "Fri, 8 Mar 2019 11:10:32 +1100") Message-ID: <874l8dj0bv.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 07/14] ppc405_boards: Don't size flash memory to match backing image List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: David Gibson Cc: Markus Armbruster , kwolf@redhat.com, qemu-block@nongnu.org, alex.bennee@linaro.org, philmd@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, mreitz@redhat.com, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, lersek@redhat.com David Gibson writes: > On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 02:03:16PM +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote: >> Machine "ref405ep" maps its flash memory at address 2^32 - image size. >> Image size is rounded up to the next multiple of 64KiB. Useless, >> because pflash_cfi02_realize() fails with "failed to read the initial >> flash content" unless the rounding is a no-op. >>=20 >> If the image size exceeds 0x80000 Bytes, we overlap first SRAM, then >> other stuff. No idea how that would play out, but useful outcomes >> seem unlikely. >>=20 >> Map the flash memory at fixed address 0xFFF80000 with size 512KiB, >> regardless of image size, to match the physical hardware. >>=20 >> Machine "taihu" maps its boot flash memory similarly. The code even >> has a comment /* XXX: should check that size is 2MB */, followed by >> disabled code to adjust the size to 2MiB regardless of image size. >>=20 >> Its code to map its application flash memory looks the same, except >> there the XXX comment asks for 32MiB, and the code to adjust the size >> isn't disabled. Note that pflash_cfi02_realize() fails with "failed >> to read the initial flash content" for images smaller than 32MiB. >>=20 >> Map the boot flash memory at fixed address 0xFFE00000 with size 2MiB, >> to match the physical hardware. Delete dead code from application >> flash mapping, and simplify some. >>=20 >> Cc: David Gibson >> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster >> Acked-by: David Gibson >> Reviewed-by: Alex Benn=C3=A9e > > I'm assuming because this is in a series I'm not otherwise CCed on > that this is going in through someone else's tree. Let me know if you > want me take it through mine. I intend to take the complete series through my tree unless a maintainer objects.