Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate the "collie" machine and Strongarm devices
On 2018-10-29 13:24, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 27 October 2018 at 12:04, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> On 10/26/18 3:12 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> Hi Guenter; there's a proposal here to deprecate (and eventually >>> remove) the 'collie' board (strongarm) from QEMU. Is that one of >>> the ones you're currently using in your automated testing of Linux >>> kernels on QEMU? >>> >> >> Yes. I can run the test with older versions of qemu, so it is ok for me >> if it is removed (as long as that removal is not backported). > > Mmm, but if we have an active user who's testing them then they > probably shouldn't be in the frontline of boards to remove. Yes, I agree. I based my patch on the assumption that the board was incomplete and not really usable (as mentioned in the patch description), but if it is still usable to some degree, then please disregard my patch. Thomas
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate the "collie" machine and Strongarm devices
Guenter Roeck writes: > On 10/29/18 6:24 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: >> On 27 October 2018 at 12:04, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>> On 10/26/18 3:12 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: Hi Guenter; there's a proposal here to deprecate (and eventually remove) the 'collie' board (strongarm) from QEMU. Is that one of the ones you're currently using in your automated testing of Linux kernels on QEMU? >>> >>> Yes. I can run the test with older versions of qemu, so it is ok for me >>> if it is removed (as long as that removal is not backported). >> >> Mmm, but if we have an active user who's testing them then they >> probably shouldn't be in the frontline of boards to remove. >> Which other boards do you test with mainline QEMU? >> > > For arm: > > akita > ast2500-evb > beagle > beaglexm > borzoi > collie > cubieboard > imx25-pdk > integratorcp > kzm > mainstone > midway > mps2-an385 > overo > palmetto-bmc > raspi2 > realview-eb > realview-eb-mpcore > realview-pb-a8 > realview-pbx-a9 > romulus-bmc > sabrelite > smdkc210 > spitz > terrier > tosa > versatileab > versatilepb > vexpress-a15 > vexpress-a15-a7 > vexpress-a9 > witherspoon-bmc > xilinx-zynq-a9 > z2 > > Though not all of them are supported by upstream qemu. For some of them I > carry local patches, > for others I use out-of-tree versions of qemu (beagle/beaglexm). Would it be possible to get useful parts of your automated testing into upstream QEMU's CI? I'm asking because I think we should require at least a smoke test in CI for all machine types, and drop the ones that lack it. Not today, but in the not-too-distant future.
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate the "collie" machine and Strongarm devices
On 29/10/18 21:24, Guenter Roeck wrote: On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 04:03:40PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: On 29/10/18 15:09, Guenter Roeck wrote: On 10/29/18 6:24 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: On 27 October 2018 at 12:04, Guenter Roeck wrote: On 10/26/18 3:12 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: Hi Guenter; there's a proposal here to deprecate (and eventually remove) the 'collie' board (strongarm) from QEMU. Is that one of the ones you're currently using in your automated testing of Linux kernels on QEMU? Yes. I can run the test with older versions of qemu, so it is ok for me if it is removed (as long as that removal is not backported). [...] Though not all of them are supported by upstream qemu. For some of them I carry local patches, for others I use out-of-tree versions of qemu (beagle/beaglexm). Are these patches upstream-able? Some of the patches (eg to be able to boot a Linux kernel image for mps2-an385 directly from qemu, or zynq CPU clock rate changes to be able to do the same) have been rejected. A few patches were submitted at some point but got lost. I don't keep track, so I don't know the exact number. For some patches, such as basic BCM283x CPRMAN support (needed to boot raspi2), a better implementation was suggested, but didn't go anywhere as far as I know. Some machines, such as beagle support, are from Linaro's tree and were never upstreamed by Linaro. The Linaro branch is based off qemu 2.3, so applying the changes to upstream qemu would be a major effort. I also use the m68k branch from github.com:vivier/qemu-m68k.git for m68k tests. I carry some 20+ patches locally in my qemu tree. Some may be obsolete or not or no longer needed (my understanding of qemu is evolving). Sometimes, if and when I find the time, I pick some and try to upstream, but I often don't follow up if there is no response or if the requested changes are too substantial. Please feel free to have a look at https://github.com/groeck/qemu (check the -local branches) and let me know what might be upstreamable. I'll be happy to (re-)submit the respective patches. Note that I won't be able to make any substantial changes, though. Time is a scarce commodity nowadays, unfortunately. Thank you for pointing your work, I'll try to salvage what I can. Regards, Phil.
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate the "collie" machine and Strongarm devices
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 04:03:40PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > Hi Guenter, > > On 29/10/18 15:09, Guenter Roeck wrote: > >On 10/29/18 6:24 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: > >>On 27 October 2018 at 12:04, Guenter Roeck wrote: > >>>On 10/26/18 3:12 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: > Hi Guenter; there's a proposal here to deprecate (and eventually > remove) the 'collie' board (strongarm) from QEMU. Is that one of > the ones you're currently using in your automated testing of Linux > kernels on QEMU? > > >>> > >>>Yes. I can run the test with older versions of qemu, so it is ok for me > >>>if it is removed (as long as that removal is not backported). > >> > >>Mmm, but if we have an active user who's testing them then they > >>probably shouldn't be in the frontline of boards to remove. > >>Which other boards do you test with mainline QEMU? > >> > > > >For arm: > > > >akita > >ast2500-evb > >beagle > >beaglexm > >borzoi > >collie > >cubieboard > >imx25-pdk > >integratorcp > >kzm > >mainstone > >midway > >mps2-an385 > >overo > >palmetto-bmc > >raspi2 > >realview-eb > >realview-eb-mpcore > >realview-pb-a8 > >realview-pbx-a9 > >romulus-bmc > >sabrelite > >smdkc210 > >spitz > >terrier > >tosa > >versatileab > >versatilepb > >vexpress-a15 > >vexpress-a15-a7 > >vexpress-a9 > >witherspoon-bmc > >xilinx-zynq-a9 > >z2 > > > >Though not all of them are supported by upstream qemu. For some of them I > >carry local patches, > >for others I use out-of-tree versions of qemu (beagle/beaglexm). > > Are these patches upstream-able? > Some of the patches (eg to be able to boot a Linux kernel image for mps2-an385 directly from qemu, or zynq CPU clock rate changes to be able to do the same) have been rejected. A few patches were submitted at some point but got lost. I don't keep track, so I don't know the exact number. For some patches, such as basic BCM283x CPRMAN support (needed to boot raspi2), a better implementation was suggested, but didn't go anywhere as far as I know. Some machines, such as beagle support, are from Linaro's tree and were never upstreamed by Linaro. The Linaro branch is based off qemu 2.3, so applying the changes to upstream qemu would be a major effort. I also use the m68k branch from github.com:vivier/qemu-m68k.git for m68k tests. I carry some 20+ patches locally in my qemu tree. Some may be obsolete or not or no longer needed (my understanding of qemu is evolving). Sometimes, if and when I find the time, I pick some and try to upstream, but I often don't follow up if there is no response or if the requested changes are too substantial. Please feel free to have a look at https://github.com/groeck/qemu (check the -local branches) and let me know what might be upstreamable. I'll be happy to (re-)submit the respective patches. Note that I won't be able to make any substantial changes, though. Time is a scarce commodity nowadays, unfortunately. Guenter
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate the "collie" machine and Strongarm devices
Hi Guenter, On 29/10/18 15:09, Guenter Roeck wrote: On 10/29/18 6:24 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: On 27 October 2018 at 12:04, Guenter Roeck wrote: On 10/26/18 3:12 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: Hi Guenter; there's a proposal here to deprecate (and eventually remove) the 'collie' board (strongarm) from QEMU. Is that one of the ones you're currently using in your automated testing of Linux kernels on QEMU? Yes. I can run the test with older versions of qemu, so it is ok for me if it is removed (as long as that removal is not backported). Mmm, but if we have an active user who's testing them then they probably shouldn't be in the frontline of boards to remove. Which other boards do you test with mainline QEMU? For arm: akita ast2500-evb beagle beaglexm borzoi collie cubieboard imx25-pdk integratorcp kzm mainstone midway mps2-an385 overo palmetto-bmc raspi2 realview-eb realview-eb-mpcore realview-pb-a8 realview-pbx-a9 romulus-bmc sabrelite smdkc210 spitz terrier tosa versatileab versatilepb vexpress-a15 vexpress-a15-a7 vexpress-a9 witherspoon-bmc xilinx-zynq-a9 z2 Though not all of them are supported by upstream qemu. For some of them I carry local patches, for others I use out-of-tree versions of qemu (beagle/beaglexm). Are these patches upstream-able? If not, what do we need to get them into upstream qemu? Thanks, Phil.
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate the "collie" machine and Strongarm devices
On 10/29/18 6:24 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: On 27 October 2018 at 12:04, Guenter Roeck wrote: On 10/26/18 3:12 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: Hi Guenter; there's a proposal here to deprecate (and eventually remove) the 'collie' board (strongarm) from QEMU. Is that one of the ones you're currently using in your automated testing of Linux kernels on QEMU? Yes. I can run the test with older versions of qemu, so it is ok for me if it is removed (as long as that removal is not backported). Mmm, but if we have an active user who's testing them then they probably shouldn't be in the frontline of boards to remove. Which other boards do you test with mainline QEMU? For arm: akita ast2500-evb beagle beaglexm borzoi collie cubieboard imx25-pdk integratorcp kzm mainstone midway mps2-an385 overo palmetto-bmc raspi2 realview-eb realview-eb-mpcore realview-pb-a8 realview-pbx-a9 romulus-bmc sabrelite smdkc210 spitz terrier tosa versatileab versatilepb vexpress-a15 vexpress-a15-a7 vexpress-a9 witherspoon-bmc xilinx-zynq-a9 z2 Though not all of them are supported by upstream qemu. For some of them I carry local patches, for others I use out-of-tree versions of qemu (beagle/beaglexm). Guenter
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate the "collie" machine and Strongarm devices
On 27 October 2018 at 12:04, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 10/26/18 3:12 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: >> Hi Guenter; there's a proposal here to deprecate (and eventually >> remove) the 'collie' board (strongarm) from QEMU. Is that one of >> the ones you're currently using in your automated testing of Linux >> kernels on QEMU? >> > > Yes. I can run the test with older versions of qemu, so it is ok for me > if it is removed (as long as that removal is not backported). Mmm, but if we have an active user who's testing them then they probably shouldn't be in the frontline of boards to remove. Which other boards do you test with mainline QEMU? thanks -- PMM
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate the "collie" machine and Strongarm devices
On 10/26/18 3:12 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: On 26 October 2018 at 11:06, Thomas Huth wrote: These files lack an entry in the MAINTAINERS file, and according to the initial commits, the board and devices are incomplete. Since there have hardly been any commits in the past to really improve them, we should consider to mark them as deprecated now. Thomas Huth (2): hw/arm: Deprecate the "collie" board arm: Deprecate the Strongarm sa1100 and sa1110 processors Hi Guenter; there's a proposal here to deprecate (and eventually remove) the 'collie' board (strongarm) from QEMU. Is that one of the ones you're currently using in your automated testing of Linux kernels on QEMU? Yes. I can run the test with older versions of qemu, so it is ok for me if it is removed (as long as that removal is not backported). Guenter
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate the "collie" machine and Strongarm devices
On 26 October 2018 at 11:06, Thomas Huth wrote: > These files lack an entry in the MAINTAINERS file, and according to > the initial commits, the board and devices are incomplete. Since there > have hardly been any commits in the past to really improve them, we > should consider to mark them as deprecated now. > > Thomas Huth (2): > hw/arm: Deprecate the "collie" board > arm: Deprecate the Strongarm sa1100 and sa1110 processors Hi Guenter; there's a proposal here to deprecate (and eventually remove) the 'collie' board (strongarm) from QEMU. Is that one of the ones you're currently using in your automated testing of Linux kernels on QEMU? thanks -- PMM
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Deprecate the "collie" machine and Strongarm devices
These files lack an entry in the MAINTAINERS file, and according to the initial commits, the board and devices are incomplete. Since there have hardly been any commits in the past to really improve them, we should consider to mark them as deprecated now. Thomas Huth (2): hw/arm: Deprecate the "collie" board arm: Deprecate the Strongarm sa1100 and sa1110 processors hw/arm/collie.c | 1 + qemu-deprecated.texi | 10 ++ 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+) -- 1.8.3.1
