Signed-off-by: Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>
---
 hw/hppa/hppa_hardware.h | 3 +--
 hw/hppa/machine.c       | 7 ++++++-
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/hw/hppa/hppa_hardware.h b/hw/hppa/hppa_hardware.h
index cdb7fa6240..bc258895c9 100644
--- a/hw/hppa/hppa_hardware.h
+++ b/hw/hppa/hppa_hardware.h
@@ -38,8 +38,7 @@
 #define PORT_PCI_CMD    (PCI_HPA + DINO_PCI_ADDR)
 #define PORT_PCI_DATA   (PCI_HPA + DINO_CONFIG_DATA)

-/* QEMU fw_cfg interface port */
-#define QEMU_FW_CFG_IO_BASE     (MEMORY_HPA + 0x80)
+#define FW_CFG_IO_BASE  0xfffa0000

 #define PORT_SERIAL1    (DINO_UART_HPA + 0x800)
 #define PORT_SERIAL2    (LASI_UART_HPA + 0x800)
diff --git a/hw/hppa/machine.c b/hw/hppa/machine.c
index 4b35afc9d5..2bed49807b 100644
--- a/hw/hppa/machine.c
+++ b/hw/hppa/machine.c
@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ static FWCfgState *create_fw_cfg(MachineState *ms)
     FWCfgState *fw_cfg;
     uint64_t val;

-    fw_cfg = fw_cfg_init_mem(QEMU_FW_CFG_IO_BASE, QEMU_FW_CFG_IO_BASE + 4);
+    fw_cfg = fw_cfg_init_mem(FW_CFG_IO_BASE, FW_CFG_IO_BASE + 4);
     fw_cfg_add_i16(fw_cfg, FW_CFG_NB_CPUS, ms->smp.cpus);
     fw_cfg_add_i16(fw_cfg, FW_CFG_MAX_CPUS, HPPA_MAX_CPUS);
     fw_cfg_add_i64(fw_cfg, FW_CFG_RAM_SIZE, ram_size);
@@ -290,6 +290,9 @@ static void machine_hppa_init(MachineState *machine)

     /* tell firmware how many SMP CPUs to present in inventory table */
     cpu[0]->env.gr[21] = smp_cpus;
+
+    /* tell firmware fw_cfg port */
+    cpu[0]->env.gr[19] = FW_CFG_IO_BASE;
 }

 static void hppa_machine_reset(MachineState *ms)
@@ -317,6 +320,8 @@ static void hppa_machine_reset(MachineState *ms)
     cpu[0]->env.gr[24] = 'c';
     /* gr22/gr23 unused, no initrd while reboot. */
     cpu[0]->env.gr[21] = smp_cpus;
+    /* tell firmware fw_cfg port */
+    cpu[0]->env.gr[19] = FW_CFG_IO_BASE;
 }


--
2.21.3

On 9/1/20 11:34 AM, Helge Deller wrote:
> -/* QEMU fw_cfg interface port */
> -#define QEMU_FW_CFG_IO_BASE     (MEMORY_HPA + 0x80)
> +#define FW_CFG_IO_BASE  0xfffa0000

Why is this value changing?


r~

On 01.09.20 23:39, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 9/1/20 11:34 AM, Helge Deller wrote:
>> -/* QEMU fw_cfg interface port */
>> -#define QEMU_FW_CFG_IO_BASE     (MEMORY_HPA + 0x80)
>> +#define FW_CFG_IO_BASE  0xfffa0000
>
> Why is this value changing?

Devices on hppa occupy at least 4k starting at the HPA,
so MEMORY_HPA+4k is blocked (by Linux) for the memory module.
I noticed this when testing the new Linux kernel patch to
let the fw_cfg entries show up in Linux under /proc:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11715133/
The Linux kernel driver could not allocate the region for fw_cfg.
This new base address seems to not conflict.

Helge

On 9/2/20 4:24 AM, Helge Deller wrote:
> On 01.09.20 23:39, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> On 9/1/20 11:34 AM, Helge Deller wrote:
>>> -/* QEMU fw_cfg interface port */
>>> -#define QEMU_FW_CFG_IO_BASE     (MEMORY_HPA + 0x80)
>>> +#define FW_CFG_IO_BASE  0xfffa0000
>>
>> Why is this value changing?
> 
> Devices on hppa occupy at least 4k starting at the HPA,
> so MEMORY_HPA+4k is blocked (by Linux) for the memory module.
> I noticed this when testing the new Linux kernel patch to
> let the fw_cfg entries show up in Linux under /proc:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11715133/
> The Linux kernel driver could not allocate the region for fw_cfg.
> This new base address seems to not conflict.

Then that information should be in a patch description, and the change should
be a completely separate patch.


r~

On 02.09.20 18:46, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 9/2/20 4:24 AM, Helge Deller wrote:
>> On 01.09.20 23:39, Richard Henderson wrote:
>>> On 9/1/20 11:34 AM, Helge Deller wrote:
>>>> -/* QEMU fw_cfg interface port */
>>>> -#define QEMU_FW_CFG_IO_BASE     (MEMORY_HPA + 0x80)
>>>> +#define FW_CFG_IO_BASE  0xfffa0000
>>>
>>> Why is this value changing?
>>
>> Devices on hppa occupy at least 4k starting at the HPA,
>> so MEMORY_HPA+4k is blocked (by Linux) for the memory module.
>> I noticed this when testing the new Linux kernel patch to
>> let the fw_cfg entries show up in Linux under /proc:
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/11715133/
>> The Linux kernel driver could not allocate the region for fw_cfg.
>> This new base address seems to not conflict.
>
> Then that information should be in a patch description, and the change should
> be a completely separate patch.

Ok, I've splitted that patch up and added the description in
the last v3 version I just sent.

Helge