From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52258) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e7kpA-0005xR-VQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 Oct 2017 12:16:10 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e7kp8-0001sb-Ae for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 Oct 2017 12:16:04 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <20171023122719.17199-1-Jason@zx2c4.com> <10e16ca3-175b-9f34-65e7-031b883b7201@amsat.org> <20171026133445.kemzfgvpbmtcogsl@kamzik.brq.redhat.com> From: "Jason A. Donenfeld" Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 18:15:57 +0200 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-arm] [PATCH] hw/arm/virt: support 4 serial ports List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Andrew Jones , =?UTF-8?Q?Philippe_Mathieu=2DDaud=C3=A9?= , QEMU Trivial , qemu-arm , QEMU Developers On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Peter Maydell w= rote: > This has *never* been guaranteed or indeed true. It's just happened > to be true for the x86 PC machine and perhaps for some others that > you've been using. For instance, the MIPS boston board only has > one uart. highbank has one. integratorcp has 2. The microblaze > boards only have one uart. And so on. In cases where we're > modelling real hardware, if the real board only has one UART > then we're only going to provide one UART, so in some cases you > just have to deal with that and have some way in your communication > protocol to multiplex across a single communications channel. Interesting. Malta provides quite a few, which is what I'm using on MIPS, so I guess I've benefited from the uniformity. Since the ARM virt machine is virtual, it seems like it'd be worthwhile to make it broadly useful, and adding a few more serial outputs is basically free. Right now on build.wireguard.com, I'm just using this horrendous patch that hopefully hurts to look at: https://=D7=90.cc/iKBdlvI3/patch (since I only need 2). The goal would be for everything else to remain the same in the deployment, but to not have to use that patch. >> Could we just do the simple patch of adding four pl011s in there? > > I'm still thinking about this. (You definitely can't have four, > though, because we already have 2 in the trustzone-enabled > config, so we can only add another 2.) The trustzone one could be the 5th? Since it's only useful for trustzone.