hw/mips/malta.c | 121 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
Hi, Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping 'malta' aliased) Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe 'malta-unreal' or 'malta-unleashed' instead? - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware restrictions (on RAM so far) - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on 64-bit Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7): hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as 'malta-virt' hw/mips/malta: Introduce MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses correct DIMM sizes hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit malta-virt hw/mips/malta.c | 121 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) -- 2.21.3
уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> је написао/ла: > Hi, > > Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion: > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > > - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping 'malta' aliased) > Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe 'malta-unreal' or > 'malta-unleashed' instead? > - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware restrictions (on RAM so far) > - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on 64-bit > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7): > hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement > hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo > hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as 'malta-virt' > hw/mips/malta: Introduce MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize > hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine > hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses correct DIMM sizes > hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit malta-virt > > hw/mips/malta.c | 121 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > -- Thank you, Philippe, for providing this series. However, in previous discussion on the patch you mention above, I already expressed serious reservations on the approach taken in that patch. These reservations stay today too. There is nothing qualitatively different between the original patch and this series. Naming and related stuff are just cosmetic issues. The good thing about this series is that one can apply it dowstream, if one finds it useful. However, it is not suitable for upstreaming Regards, Aleksandar > 2.21.3 > >
On 6/30/20 12:48 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> је написао/ла: > > Hi, > > Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion: > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> > > - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping 'malta' aliased) > Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe 'malta-unreal' or > 'malta-unleashed' instead? > - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware restrictions (on RAM so far) > - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on 64-bit > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7): > hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement > hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo > hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as 'malta-virt' > hw/mips/malta: Introduce MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize > hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine > hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses correct DIMM sizes > hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit malta-virt > > hw/mips/malta.c | 121 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > -- > > > > Thank you, Philippe, for providing this series. > > However, in previous discussion on the patch you mention above, I > already expressed serious reservations on the approach taken in that > patch. These reservations stay today too. > > There is nothing qualitatively different between the original patch and > this series. Naming and related stuff are just cosmetic issues. OK, what about considering all patches except the last one? So we can run firmware on a real Malta board, not the QEMU imaginary one (in the discussion you said QEMU should respect real hardware, which I agree). > > The good thing about this series is that one can apply it dowstream, if > one finds it useful. However, it is not suitable for upstreaming > > Regards, > Aleksandar > > > > 2.21.3 >
уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> је написао/ла: > On 6/30/20 12:48 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> је написао/ла: > > > > Hi, > > > > Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> > > > > - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping 'malta' > aliased) > > Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe 'malta-unreal' or > > 'malta-unleashed' instead? > > - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware restrictions (on RAM so > far) > > - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on 64-bit > > > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7): > > hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement > > hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo > > hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as 'malta-virt' > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine > > hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses correct DIMM sizes > > hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit malta-virt > > > > hw/mips/malta.c | 121 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > +++++++++--------- > > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Thank you, Philippe, for providing this series. > > > > However, in previous discussion on the patch you mention above, I > > already expressed serious reservations on the approach taken in that > > patch. These reservations stay today too. > > > > There is nothing qualitatively different between the original patch and > > this series. Naming and related stuff are just cosmetic issues. > > OK, what about considering all patches except the last one? > So we can run firmware on a real Malta board, not the QEMU > imaginary one (in the discussion you said QEMU should respect > real hardware, which I agree). > > Redo the series, and we can discuss, of course. > > > > The good thing about this series is that one can apply it dowstream, if > > one finds it useful. However, it is not suitable for upstreaming > > > > Regards, > > Aleksandar > > > > > > > > 2.21.3 > > >
On 6/30/20 12:54 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> је написао/ла: > > On 6/30/20 12:48 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>> је написао/ла: > > > > Hi, > > > > Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>> > > > > - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping 'malta' > aliased) > > Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe > 'malta-unreal' or > > 'malta-unleashed' instead? > > - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware restrictions (on > RAM so far) > > - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on 64-bit > > > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7): > > hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement > > hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo > > hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as 'malta-virt' > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine > > hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses correct DIMM sizes > > hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit malta-virt > > > > hw/mips/malta.c | 121 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Thank you, Philippe, for providing this series. > > > > However, in previous discussion on the patch you mention above, I > > already expressed serious reservations on the approach taken in that > > patch. These reservations stay today too. > > > > There is nothing qualitatively different between the original > patch and > > this series. Naming and related stuff are just cosmetic issues. > > OK, what about considering all patches except the last one? > So we can run firmware on a real Malta board, not the QEMU > imaginary one (in the discussion you said QEMU should respect > real hardware, which I agree). > > > Redo the series, and we can discuss, of course. I can resend without the last patch but I don't see the point, why not discuss first? QEMU should do its best to model a real Malta board. I don't want to break the current users for the existing 'malta' machine. How do you want me to name the real malta machine? > > > > > > The good thing about this series is that one can apply it > dowstream, if > > one finds it useful. However, it is not suitable for upstreaming > > > > Regards, > > Aleksandar > > > > > > > > 2.21.3 > > >
уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> је написао/ла: > On 6/30/20 12:54 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> је написао/ла: > > > > On 6/30/20 12:48 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > > > > > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>> је написао/ла: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion: > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> > > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>> > > > > > > - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping 'malta' > > aliased) > > > Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe > > 'malta-unreal' or > > > 'malta-unleashed' instead? > > > - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware restrictions (on > > RAM so far) > > > - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on 64-bit > > > > > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7): > > > hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement > > > hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo > > > hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as 'malta-virt' > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine > > > hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses correct DIMM > sizes > > > hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit malta-virt > > > > > > hw/mips/malta.c | 121 > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > > > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Philippe, for providing this series. > > > > > > However, in previous discussion on the patch you mention above, I > > > already expressed serious reservations on the approach taken in > that > > > patch. These reservations stay today too. > > > > > > There is nothing qualitatively different between the original > > patch and > > > this series. Naming and related stuff are just cosmetic issues. > > > > OK, what about considering all patches except the last one? > > So we can run firmware on a real Malta board, not the QEMU > > imaginary one (in the discussion you said QEMU should respect > > real hardware, which I agree). > > > > > > Redo the series, and we can discuss, of course. > > I can resend without the last patch but I don't see the point, > why not discuss first? > > QEMU should do its best to model a real Malta board. I don't > want to break the current users for the existing 'malta' machine. > How do you want me to name the real malta machine? > > You now self-convinced yourself that only the last patch is wrong. I repeat, the concept of the series is not ok, and, if you will, all patches in the series are not good. Regards, Aleksandar > > > > > > > > > > The good thing about this series is that one can apply it > > dowstream, if > > > one finds it useful. However, it is not suitable for upstreaming > > > > > > Regards, > > > Aleksandar > > > > > > > > > > > > 2.21.3 > > > > > >
On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:52 PM Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> wrote: > > On 6/30/20 12:48 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> је написао/ла: > > > > Hi, > > > > Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> > > > > - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping 'malta' aliased) > > Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe 'malta-unreal' or > > 'malta-unleashed' instead? > > - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware restrictions (on RAM so far) > > - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on 64-bit > > > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7): > > hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement > > hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo > > hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as 'malta-virt' > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine > > hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses correct DIMM sizes > > hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit malta-virt > > > > hw/mips/malta.c | 121 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Thank you, Philippe, for providing this series. > > > > However, in previous discussion on the patch you mention above, I > > already expressed serious reservations on the approach taken in that > > patch. These reservations stay today too. > > > > There is nothing qualitatively different between the original patch and > > this series. Naming and related stuff are just cosmetic issues. > > OK, what about considering all patches except the last one? > So we can run firmware on a real Malta board, not the QEMU > imaginary one (in the discussion you said QEMU should respect > real hardware, which I agree). > > > > > The good thing about this series is that one can apply it dowstream, if > > one finds it useful. However, it is not suitable for upstreaming IOW, what is missing to have this series (except the last patch) accepted upstream? > > > > Regards, > > Aleksandar > > > > > > > > 2.21.3 > >
уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> је написао/ла: > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:52 PM Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> > wrote: > > > > On 6/30/20 12:48 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > > > > > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> је написао/ла: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion: > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> > > > > > > - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping 'malta' > aliased) > > > Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe 'malta-unreal' or > > > 'malta-unleashed' instead? > > > - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware restrictions (on RAM so > far) > > > - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on 64-bit > > > > > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7): > > > hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement > > > hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo > > > hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as 'malta-virt' > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine > > > hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses correct DIMM sizes > > > hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit malta-virt > > > > > > hw/mips/malta.c | 121 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > +++++++++--------- > > > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Philippe, for providing this series. > > > > > > However, in previous discussion on the patch you mention above, I > > > already expressed serious reservations on the approach taken in that > > > patch. These reservations stay today too. > > > > > > There is nothing qualitatively different between the original patch and > > > this series. Naming and related stuff are just cosmetic issues. > > > > OK, what about considering all patches except the last one? > > So we can run firmware on a real Malta board, not the QEMU > > imaginary one (in the discussion you said QEMU should respect > > real hardware, which I agree). > > > > > > > > The good thing about this series is that one can apply it dowstream, if > > > one finds it useful. However, it is not suitable for upstreaming > > IOW, what is missing to have this series (except the last patch) > accepted upstream? > > It is not what is missing, but was already is in the series that makes it not suitable for upstreaming. The very concept of the series is problematic. Regards, Aleksandar > > > > > > Regards, > > > Aleksandar > > > > > > > > > > > > 2.21.3 > > > >
On 6/30/20 1:01 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> је написао/ла: > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:52 PM Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > <f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> wrote: > > > > On 6/30/20 12:48 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > > > > > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>> је написао/ла: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion: > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> > > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>> > > > > > > - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping > 'malta' aliased) > > > Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe > 'malta-unreal' or > > > 'malta-unleashed' instead? > > > - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware restrictions (on > RAM so far) > > > - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on 64-bit > > > > > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7): > > > hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement > > > hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo > > > hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as 'malta-virt' > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine > > > hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses correct DIMM > sizes > > > hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit malta-virt > > > > > > hw/mips/malta.c | 121 > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > > > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Philippe, for providing this series. > > > > > > However, in previous discussion on the patch you mention above, I > > > already expressed serious reservations on the approach taken in that > > > patch. These reservations stay today too. > > > > > > There is nothing qualitatively different between the original > patch and > > > this series. Naming and related stuff are just cosmetic issues. > > > > OK, what about considering all patches except the last one? > > So we can run firmware on a real Malta board, not the QEMU > > imaginary one (in the discussion you said QEMU should respect > > real hardware, which I agree). > > > > > > > > The good thing about this series is that one can apply it > dowstream, if > > > one finds it useful. However, it is not suitable for upstreaming > > IOW, what is missing to have this series (except the last patch) > accepted upstream? > > > It is not what is missing, but was already is in the series that makes > it not suitable for upstreaming. The very concept of the series is > problematic. What is the series is not suitable for upstream? Can you point to patch and code please? How would you conceptually resolve the problem? > > Regards, > Aleksandar > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Aleksandar > > > > > > > > > > > > 2.21.3 > > > >
уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> је написао/ла: > On 6/30/20 1:01 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> је написао/ла: > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:52 PM Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > > <f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> wrote: > > > > > > On 6/30/20 12:48 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > > > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>> је > написао/ла: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion: > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> > > > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>> > > > > > > > > - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping > > 'malta' aliased) > > > > Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe > > 'malta-unreal' or > > > > 'malta-unleashed' instead? > > > > - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware restrictions (on > > RAM so far) > > > > - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on 64-bit > > > > > > > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7): > > > > hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement > > > > hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo > > > > hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as 'malta-virt' > > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize > > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine > > > > hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses correct DIMM > > sizes > > > > hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit malta-virt > > > > > > > > hw/mips/malta.c | 121 > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > > > > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Philippe, for providing this series. > > > > > > > > However, in previous discussion on the patch you mention above, I > > > > already expressed serious reservations on the approach taken in > that > > > > patch. These reservations stay today too. > > > > > > > > There is nothing qualitatively different between the original > > patch and > > > > this series. Naming and related stuff are just cosmetic issues. > > > > > > OK, what about considering all patches except the last one? > > > So we can run firmware on a real Malta board, not the QEMU > > > imaginary one (in the discussion you said QEMU should respect > > > real hardware, which I agree). > > > > > > > > > > > The good thing about this series is that one can apply it > > dowstream, if > > > > one finds it useful. However, it is not suitable for upstreaming > > > > IOW, what is missing to have this series (except the last patch) > > accepted upstream? > > > > > > It is not what is missing, but was already is in the series that makes > > it not suitable for upstreaming. The very concept of the series is > > problematic. > > What is the series is not suitable for upstream? Can you point to > patch and code please? How would you conceptually resolve the > problem? > > The answer is already in the original thread on the original patch. The problem is artificialy imposed: One needs a feature not present in the physical system. The solution is not in creating "virtual" upgrade - this violates the basic foundation if QEMU. If the feature is missing, the optimal solution would be emulating the physical solution that has that feature. In some rare cases (that should be avoided as mush as possible), and for really good reasons, we can create an emulation of some imagined hardware that was never designed let alone built - there are a couple of examples in other targets. But extending the emulation of existing physical system with non-existing features is not acceptable. Hopefuly everything is clear now to you. :) Regards, Aleksandar > > > > Regards, > > Aleksandar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Aleksandar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2.21.3 > > > > > > >
On 6/30/20 1:17 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> је написао/ла: > > On 6/30/20 1:01 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>> је написао/ла: > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:52 PM Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > > <f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>> wrote: > > > > > > On 6/30/20 12:48 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > <f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> > > > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>>> је написао/ла: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion: > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>> > > > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>>> > > > > > > > > - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping > > 'malta' aliased) > > > > Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe > > 'malta-unreal' or > > > > 'malta-unleashed' instead? > > > > - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware > restrictions (on > > RAM so far) > > > > - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on 64-bit > > > > > > > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7): > > > > hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement > > > > hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo > > > > hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as 'malta-virt' > > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize > > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine > > > > hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses > correct DIMM > > sizes > > > > hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit malta-virt > > > > > > > > hw/mips/malta.c | 121 > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > > > > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Philippe, for providing this series. > > > > > > > > However, in previous discussion on the patch you mention > above, I > > > > already expressed serious reservations on the approach > taken in that > > > > patch. These reservations stay today too. > > > > > > > > There is nothing qualitatively different between the original > > patch and > > > > this series. Naming and related stuff are just cosmetic > issues. > > > > > > OK, what about considering all patches except the last one? > > > So we can run firmware on a real Malta board, not the QEMU > > > imaginary one (in the discussion you said QEMU should respect > > > real hardware, which I agree). > > > > > > > > > > > The good thing about this series is that one can apply it > > dowstream, if > > > > one finds it useful. However, it is not suitable for > upstreaming > > > > IOW, what is missing to have this series (except the last patch) > > accepted upstream? > > > > > > It is not what is missing, but was already is in the series that makes > > it not suitable for upstreaming. The very concept of the series is > > problematic. > > What is the series is not suitable for upstream? Can you point to > patch and code please? How would you conceptually resolve the > problem? > > > The answer is already in the original thread on the original patch. > > The problem is artificialy imposed: > > One needs a feature not present in the physical system. The solution is > not in creating "virtual" upgrade - this violates the basic foundation > if QEMU. > > If the feature is missing, the optimal solution would be emulating the > physical solution that has that feature. > > In some rare cases (that should be avoided as mush as possible), and for > really good reasons, we can create an emulation of some imagined > hardware that was never designed let alone built - there are a couple of > examples in other targets. > > But extending the emulation of existing physical system with > non-existing features is not acceptable. > > Hopefuly everything is clear now to you. :) I guess I understand a bit. I was confused by your use of "upstream". It seems you use it the wrong way, so for you "upstream" is what the MIPS enterprise world wants/needs, while "downstream" is what the open-source community wants/needs. If MIPS enterprise doesn't want a Malta machine model with 3GB of RAM, they can disable it in their downstream. If it helps the upstream community, the model is wrong anyway by using 2GB. It would be disastrous for all user to restrict the malta machine to 1GB upstream. > > Regards, > Aleksandar > > > > > > > Regards, > > Aleksandar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Aleksandar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2.21.3 > > > > > > >
уто, 30. јун 2020. у 13:34 Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> је написао/ла: > > On 6/30/20 1:17 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> је написао/ла: > > > > On 6/30/20 1:01 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > > > > > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>> је написао/ла: > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:52 PM Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > > > <f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>> wrote: > > > > > > > > On 6/30/20 12:48 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > > <f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> > > > > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>>> је написао/ла: > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion: > > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> > > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>> > > > > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> > > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>>> > > > > > > > > > > - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping > > > 'malta' aliased) > > > > > Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe > > > 'malta-unreal' or > > > > > 'malta-unleashed' instead? > > > > > - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware > > restrictions (on > > > RAM so far) > > > > > - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on 64-bit > > > > > > > > > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7): > > > > > hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement > > > > > hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo > > > > > hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as 'malta-virt' > > > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize > > > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine > > > > > hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses > > correct DIMM > > > sizes > > > > > hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit malta-virt > > > > > > > > > > hw/mips/malta.c | 121 > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > > > > > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Philippe, for providing this series. > > > > > > > > > > However, in previous discussion on the patch you mention > > above, I > > > > > already expressed serious reservations on the approach > > taken in that > > > > > patch. These reservations stay today too. > > > > > > > > > > There is nothing qualitatively different between the original > > > patch and > > > > > this series. Naming and related stuff are just cosmetic > > issues. > > > > > > > > OK, what about considering all patches except the last one? > > > > So we can run firmware on a real Malta board, not the QEMU > > > > imaginary one (in the discussion you said QEMU should respect > > > > real hardware, which I agree). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The good thing about this series is that one can apply it > > > dowstream, if > > > > > one finds it useful. However, it is not suitable for > > upstreaming > > > > > > IOW, what is missing to have this series (except the last patch) > > > accepted upstream? > > > > > > > > > It is not what is missing, but was already is in the series that makes > > > it not suitable for upstreaming. The very concept of the series is > > > problematic. > > > > What is the series is not suitable for upstream? Can you point to > > patch and code please? How would you conceptually resolve the > > problem? > > > > > > The answer is already in the original thread on the original patch. > > > > The problem is artificialy imposed: > > > > One needs a feature not present in the physical system. The solution is > > not in creating "virtual" upgrade - this violates the basic foundation > > if QEMU. > > > > If the feature is missing, the optimal solution would be emulating the > > physical solution that has that feature. > > > > In some rare cases (that should be avoided as mush as possible), and for > > really good reasons, we can create an emulation of some imagined > > hardware that was never designed let alone built - there are a couple of > > examples in other targets. > > > > But extending the emulation of existing physical system with > > non-existing features is not acceptable. > > > > Hopefuly everything is clear now to you. :) > > I guess I understand a bit. I was confused by your use of "upstream". > It seems you use it the wrong way, so for you "upstream" is what the > MIPS enterprise world wants/needs, while "downstream" is what the > open-source community wants/needs. > > If MIPS enterprise doesn't want a Malta machine model with 3GB of RAM, > they can disable it in their downstream. > If it helps the upstream community, the model is wrong anyway by using > 2GB. It would be disastrous for all user to restrict the malta machine > to 1GB upstream. > No, when I said "upstream" I meant what "upstream" always meant - our central QEMU repository. There is no different treatment of proposals whatever or whoever is the origin of the proposal. The proposals are judged only on their technical merits. It is very difficult to cooperate with you if you constantly put in my mouth what I would never say, like you did more than once in this thread. Regards, Aleksandar > > > > Regards, > > Aleksandar > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > Aleksandar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > Aleksandar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2.21.3 > > > > > > > > > >
On 6/30/20 1:55 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > уто, 30. јун 2020. у 13:34 Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> је > написао/ла: >> >> On 6/30/20 1:17 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: >>> уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org >>> <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> је написао/ла: >>> >>> On 6/30/20 1:01 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org >>> <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> >>> > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>> је написао/ла: >>> > >>> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:52 PM Philippe Mathieu-Daudé >>> > <f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> >>> <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>> wrote: >>> > > >>> > > On 6/30/20 12:48 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé >>> <f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> >>> > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> >>> > > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> >>> <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>>> је написао/ла: >>> > > > >>> > > > Hi, >>> > > > >>> > > > Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion: >>> > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ >>> <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> >>> > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ >>> <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>> >>> > > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ >>> <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> >>> > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ >>> <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>>> >>> > > > >>> > > > - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping >>> > 'malta' aliased) >>> > > > Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe >>> > 'malta-unreal' or >>> > > > 'malta-unleashed' instead? >>> > > > - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware >>> restrictions (on >>> > RAM so far) >>> > > > - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on 64-bit >>> > > > >>> > > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7): >>> > > > hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement >>> > > > hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo >>> > > > hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as 'malta-virt' >>> > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize >>> > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine >>> > > > hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses >>> correct DIMM >>> > sizes >>> > > > hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit malta-virt >>> > > > >>> > > > hw/mips/malta.c | 121 >>> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- >>> > > > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) >>> > > > >>> > > > -- >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > Thank you, Philippe, for providing this series. >>> > > > >>> > > > However, in previous discussion on the patch you mention >>> above, I >>> > > > already expressed serious reservations on the approach >>> taken in that >>> > > > patch. These reservations stay today too. >>> > > > >>> > > > There is nothing qualitatively different between the original >>> > patch and >>> > > > this series. Naming and related stuff are just cosmetic >>> issues. >>> > > >>> > > OK, what about considering all patches except the last one? >>> > > So we can run firmware on a real Malta board, not the QEMU >>> > > imaginary one (in the discussion you said QEMU should respect >>> > > real hardware, which I agree). >>> > > >>> > > > >>> > > > The good thing about this series is that one can apply it >>> > dowstream, if >>> > > > one finds it useful. However, it is not suitable for >>> upstreaming >>> > >>> > IOW, what is missing to have this series (except the last patch) >>> > accepted upstream? >>> > >>> > >>> > It is not what is missing, but was already is in the series that makes >>> > it not suitable for upstreaming. The very concept of the series is >>> > problematic. >>> >>> What is the series is not suitable for upstream? Can you point to >>> patch and code please? How would you conceptually resolve the >>> problem? >>> >>> >>> The answer is already in the original thread on the original patch. >>> >>> The problem is artificialy imposed: >>> >>> One needs a feature not present in the physical system. The solution is >>> not in creating "virtual" upgrade - this violates the basic foundation >>> if QEMU. >>> >>> If the feature is missing, the optimal solution would be emulating the >>> physical solution that has that feature. >>> >>> In some rare cases (that should be avoided as mush as possible), and for >>> really good reasons, we can create an emulation of some imagined >>> hardware that was never designed let alone built - there are a couple of >>> examples in other targets. >>> >>> But extending the emulation of existing physical system with >>> non-existing features is not acceptable. >>> >>> Hopefuly everything is clear now to you. :) >> >> I guess I understand a bit. I was confused by your use of "upstream". >> It seems you use it the wrong way, so for you "upstream" is what the >> MIPS enterprise world wants/needs, while "downstream" is what the >> open-source community wants/needs. >> >> If MIPS enterprise doesn't want a Malta machine model with 3GB of RAM, >> they can disable it in their downstream. >> If it helps the upstream community, the model is wrong anyway by using >> 2GB. It would be disastrous for all user to restrict the malta machine >> to 1GB upstream. >> > > No, when I said "upstream" I meant what "upstream" always meant - our > central QEMU repository. > > There is no different treatment of proposals whatever or whoever is > the origin of the proposal. The proposals are judged only on their > technical merits. > > It is very difficult to cooperate with you if you constantly put in my > mouth what I would never say, like you did more than once in this > thread. That would help if you answer all questions (so I don't have to guess) and explain why you decide to say "no", so I don't have to ask you for details. So I don't understand why you treat "upstream" as only owned by MIPS enterprise. Aurelien put me here to represent the hobbyist users. You can not simply say "no", we have to discuss and get a consensus for the best of all the community, not only your company/employer. This is not always easy, but this is open source, you have to work in the open with other contributors, and can not only dictate. > > Regards, > Aleksandar > >>> >>> Regards, >>> Aleksandar >>> >>> >>> >>> > >>> > Regards, >>> > Aleksandar >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > >>> > > > Regards, >>> > > > Aleksandar >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > 2.21.3 >>> > > > >>> > >>> >
уто, 30. јун 2020. у 13:59 Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> је написао/ла: > > On 6/30/20 1:55 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > уто, 30. јун 2020. у 13:34 Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org> је > > написао/ла: > >> > >> On 6/30/20 1:17 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > >>> уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > >>> <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> је написао/ла: > >>> > >>> On 6/30/20 1:01 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > >>> <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > >>> > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>> је написао/ла: > >>> > > >>> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:52 PM Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > >>> > <f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > >>> <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>> wrote: > >>> > > > >>> > > On 6/30/20 12:48 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > >>> <f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > >>> > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> > >>> > > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > >>> <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>>> је написао/ла: > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Hi, > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion: > >>> > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > >>> <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> > >>> > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > >>> <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>> > >>> > > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > >>> <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> > >>> > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > >>> <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>>> > >>> > > > > >>> > > > - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping > >>> > 'malta' aliased) > >>> > > > Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe > >>> > 'malta-unreal' or > >>> > > > 'malta-unleashed' instead? > >>> > > > - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware > >>> restrictions (on > >>> > RAM so far) > >>> > > > - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on 64-bit > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7): > >>> > > > hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement > >>> > > > hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo > >>> > > > hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as 'malta-virt' > >>> > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize > >>> > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine > >>> > > > hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses > >>> correct DIMM > >>> > sizes > >>> > > > hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit malta-virt > >>> > > > > >>> > > > hw/mips/malta.c | 121 > >>> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > >>> > > > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > >>> > > > > >>> > > > -- > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Thank you, Philippe, for providing this series. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > However, in previous discussion on the patch you mention > >>> above, I > >>> > > > already expressed serious reservations on the approach > >>> taken in that > >>> > > > patch. These reservations stay today too. > >>> > > > > >>> > > > There is nothing qualitatively different between the original > >>> > patch and > >>> > > > this series. Naming and related stuff are just cosmetic > >>> issues. > >>> > > > >>> > > OK, what about considering all patches except the last one? > >>> > > So we can run firmware on a real Malta board, not the QEMU > >>> > > imaginary one (in the discussion you said QEMU should respect > >>> > > real hardware, which I agree). > >>> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > The good thing about this series is that one can apply it > >>> > dowstream, if > >>> > > > one finds it useful. However, it is not suitable for > >>> upstreaming > >>> > > >>> > IOW, what is missing to have this series (except the last patch) > >>> > accepted upstream? > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > It is not what is missing, but was already is in the series that makes > >>> > it not suitable for upstreaming. The very concept of the series is > >>> > problematic. > >>> > >>> What is the series is not suitable for upstream? Can you point to > >>> patch and code please? How would you conceptually resolve the > >>> problem? > >>> > >>> > >>> The answer is already in the original thread on the original patch. > >>> > >>> The problem is artificialy imposed: > >>> > >>> One needs a feature not present in the physical system. The solution is > >>> not in creating "virtual" upgrade - this violates the basic foundation > >>> if QEMU. > >>> > >>> If the feature is missing, the optimal solution would be emulating the > >>> physical solution that has that feature. > >>> > >>> In some rare cases (that should be avoided as mush as possible), and for > >>> really good reasons, we can create an emulation of some imagined > >>> hardware that was never designed let alone built - there are a couple of > >>> examples in other targets. > >>> > >>> But extending the emulation of existing physical system with > >>> non-existing features is not acceptable. > >>> > >>> Hopefuly everything is clear now to you. :) > >> > >> I guess I understand a bit. I was confused by your use of "upstream". > >> It seems you use it the wrong way, so for you "upstream" is what the > >> MIPS enterprise world wants/needs, while "downstream" is what the > >> open-source community wants/needs. > >> > >> If MIPS enterprise doesn't want a Malta machine model with 3GB of RAM, > >> they can disable it in their downstream. > >> If it helps the upstream community, the model is wrong anyway by using > >> 2GB. It would be disastrous for all user to restrict the malta machine > >> to 1GB upstream. > >> > > > > No, when I said "upstream" I meant what "upstream" always meant - our > > central QEMU repository. > > > > There is no different treatment of proposals whatever or whoever is > > the origin of the proposal. The proposals are judged only on their > > technical merits. > > > > It is very difficult to cooperate with you if you constantly put in my > > mouth what I would never say, like you did more than once in this > > thread. > > That would help if you answer all questions (so I don't have to guess) > and explain why you decide to say "no", so I don't have to ask you > for details. > > So I don't understand why you treat "upstream" as only owned by MIPS > enterprise. Aurelien put me here to represent the hobbyist users. > You can not simply say "no", we have to discuss and get a consensus > for the best of all the community, not only your company/employer. > This is not always easy, but this is open source, you have to work > in the open with other contributors, and can not only dictate. > I explained to you clearly the purely technical reasons why your proposal is not good, and the reasons have nothing to do with enterprize or hobist terms (this is the third time, the third strike, in this single thread, you claim I said that I did not) and have nothing to add. Regards, Aleksandar > > > > Regards, > > Aleksandar > > > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> Aleksandar > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > >>> > Regards, > >>> > Aleksandar > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > Regards, > >>> > > > Aleksandar > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > 2.21.3 > >>> > > > > >>> > > >>> > >
On 30/06/2020 13.17, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> је написао/ла: > > On 6/30/20 1:01 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>> је написао/ла: > > > > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:52 PM Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > > <f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>> wrote: > > > > > > On 6/30/20 12:48 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > <f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> > > > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>>> је написао/ла: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion: > > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>> > > > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>>> > > > > > > > > - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping > > 'malta' aliased) > > > > Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe > > 'malta-unreal' or > > > > 'malta-unleashed' instead? > > > > - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware > restrictions (on > > RAM so far) > > > > - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on 64-bit > > > > > > > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7): > > > > hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement > > > > hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo > > > > hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as 'malta-virt' > > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize > > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine > > > > hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses > correct DIMM > > sizes > > > > hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit malta-virt > > > > > > > > hw/mips/malta.c | 121 > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- > > > > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you, Philippe, for providing this series. > > > > > > > > However, in previous discussion on the patch you mention > above, I > > > > already expressed serious reservations on the approach > taken in that > > > > patch. These reservations stay today too. > > > > > > > > There is nothing qualitatively different between the original > > patch and > > > > this series. Naming and related stuff are just cosmetic > issues. > > > > > > OK, what about considering all patches except the last one? > > > So we can run firmware on a real Malta board, not the QEMU > > > imaginary one (in the discussion you said QEMU should respect > > > real hardware, which I agree). > > > > > > > > > > > The good thing about this series is that one can apply it > > dowstream, if > > > > one finds it useful. However, it is not suitable for > upstreaming > > > > IOW, what is missing to have this series (except the last patch) > > accepted upstream? > > > > > > It is not what is missing, but was already is in the series that > makes > > it not suitable for upstreaming. The very concept of the series is > > problematic. > > What is the series is not suitable for upstream? Can you point to > patch and code please? How would you conceptually resolve the > problem? > > > The answer is already in the original thread on the original patch. > > The problem is artificialy imposed: > > One needs a feature not present in the physical system. The solution is > not in creating "virtual" upgrade - this violates the basic foundation > if QEMU. > > If the feature is missing, the optimal solution would be emulating the > physical solution that has that feature. > > In some rare cases (that should be avoided as mush as possible), and for > really good reasons, we can create an emulation of some imagined > hardware that was never designed let alone built - there are a couple of > examples in other targets. > > But extending the emulation of existing physical system with > non-existing features is not acceptable. Interesting statement. I suggest to include the following patch in your next mips pull request to avoid that mips users spoil their machines with virtual-only features: diff a/default-configs/mips-softmmu-common.mak b/default-configs/mips-softmmu-common.mak --- a/default-configs/mips-softmmu-common.mak +++ b/default-configs/mips-softmmu-common.mak @@ -6,10 +6,10 @@ CONFIG_SEMIHOSTING=y CONFIG_ISA_BUS=y CONFIG_PCI=y CONFIG_PCI_DEVICES=y +CONFIG_VIRTIO_PCI=n CONFIG_VGA_ISA=y CONFIG_VGA_ISA_MM=y CONFIG_VGA_CIRRUS=y -CONFIG_VMWARE_VGA=y CONFIG_SERIAL=y CONFIG_SERIAL_ISA=y CONFIG_PARALLEL=y ;-) No, seriously, as far as I can tell, QEMU was never in that "we strictly only emulate real hardware" camp, even the homepage talks about "virtualizer". But introducing a separate machine for this feature sounds a little bit excessive for me, too. What about introducing a machine property for the max-ram-size? With the default value, the machine could restrict the ram sizes to the values that are possible with the real hardware, and only if the (advanced) user tweaks the property, it would be possible to set bigger values. Just my 0.02 €. Thomas PS: Why does mips use CONFIG_VMWARE_VGA=y at all? Is VMWARE also available for mips? PPS: Why is mips still not using proper Kconfig settings yet?
On 6/30/20 3:36 PM, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 30/06/2020 13.17, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: >> >> >> уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org >> <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> је написао/ла: >> >> On 6/30/20 1:01 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: >> > >> > >> > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org >> <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> >> > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>> је написао/ла: >> > >> > On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 12:52 PM Philippe Mathieu-Daudé >> > <f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> >> <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>> wrote: >> > > >> > > On 6/30/20 12:48 PM, Aleksandar Markovic wrote: >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > уторак, 30. јун 2020., Philippe Mathieu-Daudé >> <f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> >> > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>> >> > > > <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org> >> <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org <mailto:f4bug@amsat.org>>>> је написао/ла: >> > > > >> > > > Hi, >> > > > >> > > > Following Jiaxun Yang's patch and discussion: >> > > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ >> <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> >> > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ >> <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>> >> > > > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ >> <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/> >> > <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/ >> <https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11416915/>>> >> > > > >> > > > - Rename the current machine as 'malta-virt' (keeping >> > 'malta' aliased) >> > > > Suggestions for better names are welcome, maybe >> > 'malta-unreal' or >> > > > 'malta-unleashed' instead? >> > > > - Add 'malta-phys' which respects hardware >> restrictions (on >> > RAM so far) >> > > > - Unleash 'malta-virt' to allow more than 2GB on >> 64-bit >> > > > >> > > > Philippe Mathieu-Daudé (7): >> > > > hw/mips/malta: Trivial code movement >> > > > hw/mips/malta: Register the machine as a TypeInfo >> > > > hw/mips/malta: Rename 'malta' machine as >> 'malta-virt' >> > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce >> MaltaMachineClass::max_ramsize >> > > > hw/mips/malta: Introduce the 'malta-phys' machine >> > > > hw/mips/malta: Verify malta-phys machine uses >> correct DIMM >> > sizes >> > > > hw/mips/malta: Allow more than 2GB on 64-bit >> malta-virt >> > > > >> > > > hw/mips/malta.c | 121 >> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- >> > > > 1 file changed, 99 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Thank you, Philippe, for providing this series. >> > > > >> > > > However, in previous discussion on the patch you mention >> above, I >> > > > already expressed serious reservations on the approach >> taken in that >> > > > patch. These reservations stay today too. >> > > > >> > > > There is nothing qualitatively different between the >> original >> > patch and >> > > > this series. Naming and related stuff are just cosmetic >> issues. >> > > >> > > OK, what about considering all patches except the last one? >> > > So we can run firmware on a real Malta board, not the QEMU >> > > imaginary one (in the discussion you said QEMU should >> respect >> > > real hardware, which I agree). >> > > >> > > > >> > > > The good thing about this series is that one can apply it >> > dowstream, if >> > > > one finds it useful. However, it is not suitable for >> upstreaming >> > >> > IOW, what is missing to have this series (except the last >> patch) >> > accepted upstream? >> > >> > >> > It is not what is missing, but was already is in the series that >> makes >> > it not suitable for upstreaming. The very concept of the series is >> > problematic. >> >> What is the series is not suitable for upstream? Can you point to >> patch and code please? How would you conceptually resolve the >> problem? >> >> >> The answer is already in the original thread on the original patch. >> >> The problem is artificialy imposed: >> >> One needs a feature not present in the physical system. The solution >> is not in creating "virtual" upgrade - this violates the basic >> foundation if QEMU. >> >> If the feature is missing, the optimal solution would be emulating the >> physical solution that has that feature. >> >> In some rare cases (that should be avoided as mush as possible), and >> for really good reasons, we can create an emulation of some imagined >> hardware that was never designed let alone built - there are a couple >> of examples in other targets. >> >> But extending the emulation of existing physical system with >> non-existing features is not acceptable. > > Interesting statement. I suggest to include the following patch in your > next mips pull request to avoid that mips users spoil their machines > with virtual-only features: > > diff a/default-configs/mips-softmmu-common.mak > b/default-configs/mips-softmmu-common.mak > --- a/default-configs/mips-softmmu-common.mak > +++ b/default-configs/mips-softmmu-common.mak > @@ -6,10 +6,10 @@ CONFIG_SEMIHOSTING=y > CONFIG_ISA_BUS=y > CONFIG_PCI=y > CONFIG_PCI_DEVICES=y > +CONFIG_VIRTIO_PCI=n > CONFIG_VGA_ISA=y > CONFIG_VGA_ISA_MM=y > CONFIG_VGA_CIRRUS=y > -CONFIG_VMWARE_VGA=y > CONFIG_SERIAL=y > CONFIG_SERIAL_ISA=y > CONFIG_PARALLEL=y > > ;-) > > No, seriously, as far as I can tell, QEMU was never in that "we strictly > only emulate real hardware" camp, even the homepage talks about > "virtualizer". > > But introducing a separate machine for this feature sounds a little bit > excessive for me, too. What about introducing a machine property for the > max-ram-size? With the default value, the machine could restrict the ram > sizes to the values that are possible with the real hardware, and only > if the (advanced) user tweaks the property, it would be possible to set > bigger values. Just my 0.02 €. > > Thomas > > > PS: Why does mips use CONFIG_VMWARE_VGA=y at all? Is VMWARE also > available for mips? > > PPS: Why is mips still not using proper Kconfig settings yet? Related to "ACPI + ICH9 + PIIX4" interdependence with X86. Fixing MIPS would break X86. We can not break X86 (and there is little interest from enterprise X86 on solving MIPS emulation problems). Then I consumed all the time my manager granted me to work on it, so it is very low in my list. If someone else want to do it, help welcomed.
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.