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=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_NEOMUTT 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 5784FC4321A for ; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 06:47:32 +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 3111420896 for ; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 06:47:32 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3111420896 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]:52126 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1haaZ5-0003WN-7S for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 02:47:31 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54504) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1haaWL-0002TY-BM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 02:44:38 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1haaJF-00081C-25 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 02:31:07 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:44678) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1haaJ5-0007do-0T; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 02:30:56 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A31D356F6; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 06:30:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sirius.home.kraxel.org (ovpn-117-25.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.117.25]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F83951409; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 06:30:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: by sirius.home.kraxel.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 475B616E18; Tue, 11 Jun 2019 08:30:19 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2019 08:30:19 +0200 From: Gerd Hoffmann To: Palmer Dabbelt Message-ID: <20190611063019.2uiatioxh73lrgqz@sirius.home.kraxel.org> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.30]); Tue, 11 Jun 2019 06:30:28 +0000 (UTC) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] RISC-V: Include ROM in QEMU 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-riscv@nongnu.org, sagark@eecs.berkeley.edu, onathan@fintelia.io, Bastian Koppelmann , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Alistair Francis , alistair23@gmail.com Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 05:03:42PM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > On Thu, 06 Jun 2019 16:22:47 PDT (-0700), alistair23@gmail.com wrote: > > Hello, > > > > As a test of the waters, how would the QEMU community feel about > > including the RISC-V OpenSBI project as a ROM submodule? > > > > The idea would be to have OpenSBI (similar to ATF for ARM and a BIOS > > for x86) included by default to simplify the QEMU RISC-V boot process > > for users. This would remove the requirement for users/developers to > > build a RISC-V firmware. The goal here is to allow people to just > > download and run their kernel as easily as they currently do for x86. > > > > We would make sure that it can be disabled! That is users/developers > > can use their own (or none) if they want to. The idea here is just to > > simplify the boot process, not lock anyone out. > > I like it. My only question is about the mechanics of doing so: are we just > going to assume there's a cross compiler in PATH? I guess that's less of a > usability headache than needing a complier and a firmware. Usual way to add firmware: (1) Add a submodule below roms/ (2) Add rules to build the firmware to roms/Makefile. Firmware maintainers can use them, and they also document the build process. A normal qemu build will not automatically build the firmware though. (3) Place a pre-built binary in pc-bios/ There is some cross compiler detection logic in roms/Makefile which you can use. cheers, Gerd