On 10/01/2018 11:43, Juan Quintela wrote: > Laurent Vivier <lviv...@redhat.com> wrote: >> On 10/01/2018 10:21, Laurent Vivier wrote: >>> On 10/01/2018 09:47, Juan Quintela wrote: >>>> Peter Xu <pet...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Jan 05, 2018 at 10:52:37PM +0100, Juan Quintela wrote: >>>>>> Argument file is also needed there. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com> >>>>> >>>>> Reviewed-by: Peter Xu <pet...@redhat.com> >>>>> >>>>> Does it also mean this? >>>>> >>>>> Fixes: aaf89c8a49a8c ("test: port postcopy test to ppc64") >>>> >>>> Dunno. I was trying to consolidate the command line options for ppc and >>>> x86 when I found this problem. I haven't tested of ppc. >>> >>> I don't think it is needed. I think the content of the nvram is migrated >>> (otherwise the test wouldn't work at all). >>> >>> The nvram is created by default, we need the command line parameter only >>> to populate it from a file. >> >> A better change would be to use "-prom-env" instead of "-driver >> if=pflash". I can send the patch if you want to add it in your series. > > Told the command line and I will add to the line. > > And using the same command in both sides makes easier to see that it is > correct. > > Later, Juan. >
("-machine accel=%s -m 256M" " -name pcsource,debug-threads=on" " -serial file:%s/src_serial" " -prom-env '" "boot-command=hex .\" _\" begin %x %x " "do i c@ 1 + i c! 1000 +loop .\" B\" 0 " "until'", accel, tmpfs, end_address, start_address); Don't forget to remove include of "hw/nvram/chrp_nvram.h", MIN_NVRAM_SIZE and init_bootfile_ppc(). Thanks, Laurent