On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 12:53 AM BALATON Zoltan <bala...@eik.bme.hu> wrote:
> On Thu, 12 Jan 2023, Howard Spoelstra wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2023 at 1:15 AM BALATON Zoltan <bala...@eik.bme.hu> > wrote: > > > >> On Tue, 10 Jan 2023, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote: > >>> On 04/01/2023 21:59, BALATON Zoltan wrote: > >>> > >>>> Setting emulated machine type with a property called "via" is > >>>> confusing users so deprecate the "via" option in favour of newly added > >>>> explicit machine types. The default via=cuda option is not a valid > >>>> config (no real Mac has this combination of hardware) so no machine > >>>> type could be defined for that therefore it is kept for backwards > >>>> compatibility with older QEMU versions for now but other options > >>>> resembling real machines are deprecated. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: BALATON Zoltan <bala...@eik.bme.hu> > >>> > >>> I believe that people do use -M mac99,via=cuda to run some rare > versions > >> of > >>> MacOS in QEMU (I think possibly OS X DP and Workgroup Server?), so we > >> would > >>> want to keep this option somewhere. > >> > >> The idea is that after previous patches we now have machine types for > all > >> other via option values (that also match real Mac machines) other than > >> via=cude but that is the default for mac99 so after the reprecation > period > >> when the via option is removed mac99 (which is the same as > mac99,via=cuda) > >> can remain for this use case (and for backward compatibility) until the > >> other machines are fixed to not need this any more. So all via options > are > >> still available but as different machine types. > >> > > My 2 cents about naming: > > It seems less important how the machines are named when their name is not > > covering their definition. F.i. the powermac3,1 never had adb, could not > be > > equipped with a G3 cpu, did not run at 900Mhz. The closest possible > > qemu-options based definition of a powermac3,1 (via=pmu) will not run Mac > > OS 9.0.4 ;-) due to the 2 USB devices problem. To run that via=cuda is > > already needed. > > What does that mean? Should we aim to emulate real Macs or are we happy > with the Franken-Mac we have now? > The names also show what we intend to > emulate even though the emulation may not be complete or have bugs (this > is also true for other machines in QEMU where a lot of them are not fully > emulated, only well enough to boot guest OSes). > > Looks like everybody has forgotten the previous discussion and not read > the docs and deprecation patches where this is explained so I summarise > the proposed change here again: > > No, I haven't forgotten that discussion. FWIW (as I cannot contribute): I personally do not oppose a name change, the new names seem more descriptive. I tested your patches and they behave as they should. The functionality does not change. However, my simple point was what's in a name when the underlying machine does not reflect what the name implies. It is not my place to comment on a possible development agenda. I can only tell you what I'd like and point out issues. > - qemu-system-ppc -M mac99 is unchanged and works like before it just > warns for the via option and when using it in qemu-system-ppc64 suggesting > using new machines instead so these could evetually be removed next year. > mac99,via=cuda is just mac99 so you can continue to use that, mac99 is > not deprecated and don't want to remove it. > > - qemu-system-ppc64 -M mac99 -> powermac7_3 > > - qemu-system-ppc -M mac99,via=pmu -> powermac3,1 > > - qemu-system-ppc64 -M mac99,via=pmu-adb -> powerbook3_2 > > The last one is one of the rare Macs that had adb and pmu, all others with > pmu usually have USB. The PowerMac1,2 (G4 PCI) had CUDA but not with mac99 > hardware but more similar to g3beige and no ADB ports according to > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Mac_G4#1st_generation:_Graphite > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Macintosh_G3_(Blue_and_White)#Hardware > > The PowerMac7,3 seems to be matching the PCI device listing in the comment > at the beginning of mac_newworld.c and also this article: > https://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=606582 > > What is the 2 USB devices problem? Is it the one we've debugged before and > found that it's noted in a comment marked with ??? in hw/usb/hcd-ohci.c? > That could be fixed if there was somebody interested enough to provide a > patch. > It is not about passing through USB devices and active packets per endpoint. The powermac3,1 has two 2 USB 1.1 ports. However, when booting Mac OS 9.0.4 with via=pmu it will support only one (the kbd). When started with via=cuda -usb -device usb-kbd -device usb-mouse it will support the first-mentioned usb-kbd. When kbd and mouse arguments are reversed it supports the other device ;-) > > But this series does not remove the mac99 and does not even deprecate it. > What it deprecates are the via option to select different machine types > and the automatic detection of ppc64 to emulate something different which > are hard to understand for users and caused several misunderstandings. > It's much more clear to have a separate machine type for each machine we > emulate even when they aren't yet complete but at least we know which way > to go and can compare to real hardware and fix the missing parts later. > Also introducing powermac7_3 to split the ppc64 mac99 would allow to > remove qemu-system-ppc if we wanted and only have one executable for all > machines but even without this it's clearer to have separate machnies for > G5 and G4 macs than mac99 silently behaving differently. > > Regards, > BALATON Zoltan >
