On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 02:59:39PM +0300, Riku Voipio wrote: > On 7 August 2013 20:31, Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 06:53:02PM +0200, Alexander Spyridakis wrote: > >> On 7 August 2013 16:51, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> > > I thought that vexpress-v2p-ca15-tc1.dtb was not meant to be used for a > >> > > guest and that it can actually cause problems. > >> > > >> > It's the one I usually use in my tests... If there's a good reason > >> > why we shouldn't be using it I'd be interested to know. > >> > > >> > >> Thanks for clarifying this, I remember specifically not using > >> vexpress-v2p-ca15-tc1.dtb from the arm-dts repository, back in 3.8 era and > >> before. > > > > There was a time when this was out of sync with what the kernel > > expected. At least vexpress-v2p-ca15-tc1.dtb from the kernel tree works > > for me for both TCG and KVM with QEMU. > > I presume with "kernel tree" you mean mainline or something derived. I > see the mainline kernel doesn't have the patch below: > For the record, with "kernel tree" I mean that assuming you're not using some broken kernel, the device tree included with the kernel should match the kernel sources - as apposed to grabbing the device tree from some external repository. That "kernel tree" being mainline or some fork. Of course in this case, the Linaro tree seemed to be just broken... -Christoffer _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/kvmarm
