On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 9:03 PM, Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de wrote:
Am 19.01.2015 um 16:22 schrieb Artyom Tarasenko:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de wrote:
Am 19.01.2015 um 13:57 schrieb Artyom Tarasenko:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Paolo Bonzini
On 19/01/2015 13:57, Artyom Tarasenko wrote:
Is it really ISA if it's MMIO? In other words, why can't this be a
sysbus device?
On physical machines it's EBus, which is pretty much like 8-bit ISA.
So, I think modelling it as ISA is closer to to the reality.
But out of curiosity, would it
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
On 19/01/2015 13:57, Artyom Tarasenko wrote:
Is it really ISA if it's MMIO? In other words, why can't this be a
sysbus device?
On physical machines it's EBus, which is pretty much like 8-bit ISA.
So, I think
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
On 19/01/2015 12:35, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
Similar to m48t59_init(), add a mem_base value so that NVRAM can be mapped
via
MMIO rather than ioport if required.
Signed-off-by: Mark Cave-Ayland
On 19/01/2015 12:35, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
Similar to m48t59_init(), add a mem_base value so that NVRAM can be mapped via
MMIO rather than ioport if required.
Signed-off-by: Mark Cave-Ayland mark.cave-ayl...@ilande.co.uk
---
Is it really ISA if it's MMIO? In other words, why can't this
Am 19.01.2015 um 13:57 schrieb Artyom Tarasenko:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
On 19/01/2015 12:35, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
Similar to m48t59_init(), add a mem_base value so that NVRAM can be mapped
via
MMIO rather than ioport if required.
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de wrote:
Am 19.01.2015 um 13:57 schrieb Artyom Tarasenko:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
On 19/01/2015 12:35, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
Similar to m48t59_init(), add a mem_base value so that
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
On 19/01/2015 16:22, Artyom Tarasenko wrote:
On physical machines it's EBus, which is pretty much like 8-bit ISA.
So, I think modelling it as ISA is closer to to the reality.
But out of curiosity, would it be
On 19/01/2015 16:38, Andreas Färber wrote:
Is there an EBus bridge PCI device similar to the PCI-to-ISA bridge?
In the previous dump, the ebus entry looked like one to me?
bus: pci
dev: ebus, id
addr = 03.0
class Bridge, addr 00:03.0, pci id 108e:1000 (sub
On 19 January 2015 at 12:57, Artyom Tarasenko atar4q...@gmail.com wrote:
But out of curiosity, would it be possible to have a sysbus device
somewhere in a middle of PCI space? Do sysbus devices have higher
priority if the address spaces overlap? Or do you mean that the PCI
controller needs to
On 19/01/2015 16:22, Artyom Tarasenko wrote:
On physical machines it's EBus, which is pretty much like 8-bit ISA.
So, I think modelling it as ISA is closer to to the reality.
But out of curiosity, would it be possible to have a sysbus device
somewhere in a middle of PCI space? [...]
Am 19.01.2015 um 16:31 schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
Is there an EBus bridge PCI device similar to the PCI-to-ISA bridge?
In the previous dump, the ebus entry looked like one to me?
bus: pci
dev: ebus, id
addr = 03.0
class Bridge, addr 00:03.0, pci id 108e:1000 (sub
Similar to m48t59_init(), add a mem_base value so that NVRAM can be mapped via
MMIO rather than ioport if required.
Signed-off-by: Mark Cave-Ayland mark.cave-ayl...@ilande.co.uk
---
hw/ppc/prep.c |2 +-
hw/sparc64/sun4u.c|2 +-
hw/timer/m48t59.c |9
On 19/01/15 15:01, Andreas Färber wrote:
Am 19.01.2015 um 13:57 schrieb Artyom Tarasenko:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
On 19/01/2015 12:35, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
Similar to m48t59_init(), add a mem_base value so that NVRAM can be mapped
via
On 19 January 2015 at 16:48, Mark Cave-Ayland
mark.cave-ayl...@ilande.co.uk wrote:
I'm not sure this would work for SPARC64 since potentially OpenBIOS can
program the I/O BAR for the ebus anywhere (and the NVRAM is located on
the ebus). At the moment we cheat by creating an alias to I/O space
On 19/01/15 15:31, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 19/01/2015 16:22, Artyom Tarasenko wrote:
On physical machines it's EBus, which is pretty much like 8-bit ISA.
So, I think modelling it as ISA is closer to to the reality.
But out of curiosity, would it be possible to have a sysbus device
somewhere
On 19/01/15 15:04, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 19 January 2015 at 12:57, Artyom Tarasenko atar4q...@gmail.com wrote:
But out of curiosity, would it be possible to have a sysbus device
somewhere in a middle of PCI space? Do sysbus devices have higher
priority if the address spaces overlap? Or do
On 19/01/2015 17:17, Artyom Tarasenko wrote:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 4:31 PM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
On 19/01/2015 16:22, Artyom Tarasenko wrote:
On physical machines it's EBus, which is pretty much like 8-bit ISA.
So, I think modelling it as ISA is closer to to the
On 19/01/15 16:17, Artyom Tarasenko wrote:
Is there an EBus bridge PCI device similar to the PCI-to-ISA bridge?
As physical devices there are integrated SBus-to-EBus and PCI-to-EBus bridges.
But actually I may have been wrong about NVRAM always sitting on the
EBus: looking at the page 28
On Mon, 19 Jan 2015, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
The reason I asked is simply because ISA devices never do MMIO (apart
for the VGA window).
You mean in the QEMU world? At least physical SCSI and Ethernet
adapters had a MMIO space for the onboard ROM.
Uh right, ROMs count as MMIO too.
Le 19/01/2015 16:01, Andreas Färber a écrit :
Also, wasn't Hervé's(?) plan to get rid of mem_base completely by always
passing a pointer to ISADevice/ISABus around? It should only be needed
when somewhere NULL is being passed, no?
Yes, I've a patch series which is removing the isa_mem_base
Am 19.01.2015 um 16:22 schrieb Artyom Tarasenko:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 4:01 PM, Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de wrote:
Am 19.01.2015 um 13:57 schrieb Artyom Tarasenko:
On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
On 19/01/2015 12:35, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
22 matches
Mail list logo
