On 16 July 2013 15:31, Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 10:25 PM, Peter Maydell
> <peter.maydell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Replace the opencoded assembly of the reg property array for the
>> /memory node with a call to qemu_devtree_setprop_sized_cells().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> hw/arm/boot.c | 29 ++++++++---------------------
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/arm/boot.c b/hw/arm/boot.c
>> index a2e4032..1780316 100644
>> --- a/hw/arm/boot.c
>> +++ b/hw/arm/boot.c
>> @@ -227,12 +227,10 @@ static void set_kernel_args_old(const struct arm_boot_info *info)
>>
>> static int load_dtb(hwaddr addr, const struct arm_boot_info *binfo)
>> {
>> - uint32_t *mem_reg_property;
>> - uint32_t mem_reg_propsize;
>> void *fdt = NULL;
>> char *filename;
>> int size, rc;
>> - uint32_t acells, scells, hival;
>> + uint32_t acells, scells;
>>
>> filename = qemu_find_file(QEMU_FILE_TYPE_BIOS, binfo->dtb_filename);
>> if (!filename) {
>> @@ -255,29 +253,18 @@ static int load_dtb(hwaddr addr, const struct arm_boot_info *binfo)
>> goto fail;
>> }
>>
>> - mem_reg_propsize = acells + scells;
>> - mem_reg_property = g_new0(uint32_t, mem_reg_propsize);
>> - mem_reg_property[acells - 1] = cpu_to_be32(binfo->loader_start);
>> - hival = cpu_to_be32(binfo->loader_start >> 32);
>> - if (acells > 1) {
>> - mem_reg_property[acells - 2] = hival;
>> - } else if (hival != 0) {
>> - fprintf(stderr, "qemu: dtb file not compatible with "
>> - "RAM start address > 4GB\n");
>> - goto fail;
>> - }
>
> So it confused me for a while as to why this check is deleted (and not
> converted), but I'm guessing it is because binfo->loader_start is a
> hwaddr which is probably 32 bit? Which I guess would cause a check
> equivalent to the one below to werror. Is it possible in an arm build
> for hwaddr to be 64 bit and if so should this check be converted?
It's because the "ram start address won't fit" is basically a
bug in the implementation of a QEMU machine -- it will basically
only fire for a board which put its RAM all beyond the 4GB
boundary (vanishingly unlikely as it would be a really stupid
bit of h/w design) *and* where the user had a DTB with a one-cell
address size field. So I'm happy to have that fail via the
call to set_sized_cells() failing, without calling it out as
a specific error message.
(hwaddr are always 64 bits for everybody now.)
-- PMM
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/kvmarm
