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=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 06A3FC433E0 for ; Tue, 19 May 2020 09:36:23 +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 CEE30207D8 for ; Tue, 19 May 2020 09:36:22 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org CEE30207D8 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kaod.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:52542 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jayfd-0005oz-Vs for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 19 May 2020 05:36:22 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60518) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jayf8-0005Pt-1f for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 May 2020 05:35:50 -0400 Received: from 10.mo7.mail-out.ovh.net ([178.33.250.56]:53303) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jayf6-0007gU-UB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 May 2020 05:35:49 -0400 Received: from player789.ha.ovh.net (unknown [10.110.208.131]) by mo7.mail-out.ovh.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 412A91654DE for ; Tue, 19 May 2020 11:35:46 +0200 (CEST) Received: from kaod.org (82-64-250-170.subs.proxad.net [82.64.250.170]) (Authenticated sender: clg@kaod.org) by player789.ha.ovh.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1825F1289D8FE; Tue, 19 May 2020 09:35:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: garm.ovh; auth=pass (GARM-103G0056ebaf816-57fe-41d9-80f3-70ed41fbb63f,3DCE2E61E2D7C1BA27EF92566E0C35A5904F621F) smtp.auth=clg@kaod.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/24] aspeed: Don't create unwanted "cortex-a7-arm-cpu" devices To: Markus Armbruster , Joel Stanley References: <20200518050408.4579-1-armbru@redhat.com> <20200518050408.4579-6-armbru@redhat.com> <87r1vg5vep.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> From: =?UTF-8?Q?C=c3=a9dric_Le_Goater?= Message-ID: <802f4237-8e2b-e322-a7ba-24ec33d7b99d@kaod.org> Date: Tue, 19 May 2020 11:35:34 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87r1vg5vep.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 12137482472405240782 X-VR-SPAMSTATE: OK X-VR-SPAMSCORE: -100 X-VR-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduhedruddtjedgudekucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuqfggjfdpvefjgfevmfevgfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecuhedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhepuffvfhfhkffffgggjggtgfesthekredttdefjeenucfhrhhomhepveorughrihgtpgfnvggpifhorghtvghruceotghlgheskhgrohgurdhorhhgqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeefffdvtddugeeifeduuefghfejgfeigeeigeeltedthefgieeiveeuiefhgeefgfenucfkpheptddrtddrtddrtddpkedvrdeigedrvdehtddrudejtdenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhhouggvpehsmhhtphdqohhuthdphhgvlhhopehplhgrhigvrhejkeelrdhhrgdrohhvhhdrnhgvthdpihhnvghtpedtrddtrddtrddtpdhmrghilhhfrhhomheptghlgheskhgrohgurdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohepqhgvmhhuqdguvghvvghlsehnohhnghhnuhdrohhrgh Received-SPF: pass client-ip=178.33.250.56; envelope-from=clg@kaod.org; helo=10.mo7.mail-out.ovh.net X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/05/19 05:35:46 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.11 and newer X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action 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: Peter Maydell , berrange@redhat.com, Eduardo Habkost , Andrew Jeffery , QEMU Developers , qemu-arm , Paolo Bonzini Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 5/19/20 7:46 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Joel Stanley writes: > >> On Mon, 18 May 2020 at 12:24, Cédric Le Goater wrote: >>> >>> On 5/18/20 7:03 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote: >>>> The number of CPUs is controlled by property "num-cpus". >>>> aspeed_soc_ast2600_init() creates the maximum supported number. >>>> aspeed_soc_ast2600_realize() realizes only the wanted number. Works, >>>> although it leaves unrealized devices hanging around in the QOM >>>> composition tree. Affects machines ast2600-evb and tacoma-bmc. >>>> >>>> Make the init functions create only the wanted ones. Visible in "info >>>> qom-tree"; here's the change for ast2600-evb: >>>> >>>> /machine (ast2600-evb-machine) >>>> [...] >>>> /soc (ast2600-a1) >>>> [...] >>>> /cpu[0] (cortex-a7-arm-cpu) >>>> /unnamed-gpio-in[0] (irq) >>>> /unnamed-gpio-in[1] (irq) >>>> /unnamed-gpio-in[2] (irq) >>>> /unnamed-gpio-in[3] (irq) >>>> - /cpu[1] (cortex-a7-arm-cpu) >>>> - /unnamed-gpio-in[0] (irq) >>>> - /unnamed-gpio-in[1] (irq) >>>> - /unnamed-gpio-in[2] (irq) >>>> - /unnamed-gpio-in[3] (irq) >>>> /ehci[0] (platform-ehci-usb) >>>> >>>> Cc: "Cédric Le Goater" >>>> Cc: Peter Maydell >>>> Cc: Andrew Jeffery >>>> Cc: Joel Stanley >>>> Cc: qemu-arm@nongnu.org >>>> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Cédric Le Goater >>> >>> Joel, Andrew, >>> >>> Shouldn't we enforce a default/min/max number of CPUs of 2 for the AST2600 ? >>> That's the SoC definition. The fact it is configurable in the Aspeed model >>> was nice to have during bringup but we are now done. >> >> Agreed, we want there to always be two CPUs for the 2600. > > Follow-up patch welcome! I just sent a patch on this topic. C.