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
