From: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> To: Heyi Guo <guoheyi@huawei.com> Cc: qemu-arm <qemu-arm@nongnu.org>, QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com, Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] arm/virt: add one more uart for UEFI runtime debug Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2019 14:16:08 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CAFEAcA-N=y3k41oexvYaQ+tKj1d2tCZh8MhPvdq8Uz7dh-eWWA@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <1554624893-8363-1-git-send-email-guoheyi@huawei.com> On Sun, 7 Apr 2019 at 09:19, Heyi Guo <guoheyi@huawei.com> wrote: > > This patch is based on the discussion in TianoCore edk2-devel mailing > list: > https://lists.01.org/pipermail/edk2-devel/2019-March/037986.html > > The conclusion is that we need an individual UART for UEFI runtime > services to print debug message at runtime, to avoid conflicting with > the system UART. We cannot use the secure UART either, for we may both > have Trusted Firmware and UEFI runtime services running on the VM, and > it is not easy to keep synchronization between the two components. I don't think it makes much sense to keep adding UARTs for every bit of the system software stack. We don't have an infinite supply of UARTs on real hardware either -- how is this handled there ? Also adding new UARTs to this board is awkward because of the weird choices various bits of software have made in reading the dtb and picking a UART if there's more than one listed. > @@ -713,13 +715,23 @@ static void create_uart(const VirtMachineState *vms, qemu_irq *pic, int uart, > if (uart == VIRT_UART) { > qemu_fdt_setprop_string(vms->fdt, "/chosen", "stdout-path", nodename); > } else { > + const char *status_string; > + > + if (uart == VIRT_SECURE_UART) { > + status_string = "secure-status"; > + } else { > + status_string = "uefi-status"; Where does this status string come from? The "secure-status" one is documented in the device tree spec and has a well defined meaning. thanks -- PMM
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> To: Heyi Guo <guoheyi@huawei.com> Cc: wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com, qemu-arm <qemu-arm@nongnu.org>, Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>, QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] arm/virt: add one more uart for UEFI runtime debug Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2019 14:16:08 +0100 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CAFEAcA-N=y3k41oexvYaQ+tKj1d2tCZh8MhPvdq8Uz7dh-eWWA@mail.gmail.com> (raw) Message-ID: <20190407131608.r_r8zJeZb3iY4w4w3vCFbjcMBmzy6Fc5I4y5GHKKO1A@z> (raw) In-Reply-To: <1554624893-8363-1-git-send-email-guoheyi@huawei.com> On Sun, 7 Apr 2019 at 09:19, Heyi Guo <guoheyi@huawei.com> wrote: > > This patch is based on the discussion in TianoCore edk2-devel mailing > list: > https://lists.01.org/pipermail/edk2-devel/2019-March/037986.html > > The conclusion is that we need an individual UART for UEFI runtime > services to print debug message at runtime, to avoid conflicting with > the system UART. We cannot use the secure UART either, for we may both > have Trusted Firmware and UEFI runtime services running on the VM, and > it is not easy to keep synchronization between the two components. I don't think it makes much sense to keep adding UARTs for every bit of the system software stack. We don't have an infinite supply of UARTs on real hardware either -- how is this handled there ? Also adding new UARTs to this board is awkward because of the weird choices various bits of software have made in reading the dtb and picking a UART if there's more than one listed. > @@ -713,13 +715,23 @@ static void create_uart(const VirtMachineState *vms, qemu_irq *pic, int uart, > if (uart == VIRT_UART) { > qemu_fdt_setprop_string(vms->fdt, "/chosen", "stdout-path", nodename); > } else { > + const char *status_string; > + > + if (uart == VIRT_SECURE_UART) { > + status_string = "secure-status"; > + } else { > + status_string = "uefi-status"; Where does this status string come from? The "secure-status" one is documented in the device tree spec and has a well defined meaning. thanks -- PMM
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-07 13:16 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2019-04-07 8:14 [Qemu-devel] [RFC] arm/virt: add one more uart for UEFI runtime debug Heyi Guo 2019-04-07 8:14 ` Heyi Guo 2019-04-07 13:16 ` Peter Maydell [this message] 2019-04-07 13:16 ` Peter Maydell 2019-04-08 1:45 ` Heyi Guo 2019-04-08 1:45 ` Heyi Guo 2019-04-08 9:43 ` Peter Maydell 2019-04-08 9:43 ` Peter Maydell
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to='CAFEAcA-N=y3k41oexvYaQ+tKj1d2tCZh8MhPvdq8Uz7dh-eWWA@mail.gmail.com' \ --to=peter.maydell@linaro.org \ --cc=guoheyi@huawei.com \ --cc=lersek@redhat.com \ --cc=qemu-arm@nongnu.org \ --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \ --cc=wanghaibin.wang@huawei.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.