On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 at 16:07, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <phi...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 2/18/19 1:56 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Good news: when you read (0x0000, 0x0000, 0x0000, 0x0000) pflash IDs, > that means the code uses the "Virt PFlash". IOW this is not a physical > model, since the guest obviously doesn't care about checking the flash > model. > The "VirtPFlash" only has 64KiB sectors. > > I suggest we add a pflash_cfi02_create_virt(reduced args) helper to make > this obvious: > > pflash_cfi02_create_virt(paddr, name, size_bytes, mapping?).
What would this be, and when would you use it without a /* FIXME this is not what the real hardware does */ ? The real problem with most of these pflash creation calls is that they're using bogus data for the flash device (wrong IDs, wrong width, using the legacy weird implementation, etc etc) because nobody cares much about the boards or has real hardware to see what the hardware really is doing. thanks -- PMM
