On 22/01/2023 21:48, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
On Sun, 22 Jan 2023, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
On 11/01/2023 00:36, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2023, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
On 04/01/2023 21:59, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
The mac99 machine emulates different machines depending on machine
properties or even if it is run as qemu-system-ppc64 or
qemu-system-ppc. This is very confusing for users and many hours were
lost trying to explain it or finding out why commands users came up
with are not working as expected. (E.g. Windows users might think
qemu-system-ppc64 is just the 64 bit version of qemu-system-ppc and
then fail to boot a 32 bit OS with -M mac99 trying to follow an
example that had qemu-system-ppc.) To avoid such confusion, add
explicit machine types for the different configs which will work the
same with both qemu-system-ppc and qemu-system-ppc64 and also make the
command line clearer for new users.
Signed-off-by: BALATON Zoltan <bala...@eik.bme.hu>
Some thoughts on this: the first is that not everyone agrees that for
qemu-system-X that X represents the target. There were previous discussion where
some KVM people assumed X represented the host, i.e. ppc64 was the binary that
ran all PPC guests but with hardware acceleration for ppc64 guests on ppc64
hosts. This was a while ago, so it may be worth starting a thread on qemu-devel
to see what the current consensus is.
I don't see how this is relevant to this series, Also likely not the case any more
as qemu-system-ppc and qemu-system-ppc64 share most of the code since a while with
ppc64 including the config of ppc and adding more machines.
Well the patch defines the powermac 7.3 machine just for TARGET_PPC64, no? So
you're making the assumption qemu-system-ppc64 represents a 64-bit target rather
than a 64-bit host.
I'm not making that assumption, it's already there:
$ qemu-system-ppc -machine help
Supported machines are:
40p IBM RS/6000 7020 (40p)
bamboo bamboo
g3beige Heathrow based PowerMAC (default)
mac99 Mac99 based PowerMAC
mpc8544ds mpc8544ds
none empty machine
pegasos2 Genesi/bPlan Pegasos II
ppce500 generic paravirt e500 platform
ref405ep ref405ep
sam460ex aCube Sam460ex
virtex-ml507 Xilinx Virtex ML507 reference design
$ qemu-system-ppc64 -machine help
Supported machines are:
40p IBM RS/6000 7020 (40p)
bamboo bamboo
g3beige Heathrow based PowerMAC
mac99 Mac99 based PowerMAC
mpc8544ds mpc8544ds
none empty machine
pegasos2 Genesi/bPlan Pegasos II
powernv10 IBM PowerNV (Non-Virtualized) POWER10
powernv8 IBM PowerNV (Non-Virtualized) POWER8
powernv IBM PowerNV (Non-Virtualized) POWER9 (alias of powernv9)
powernv9 IBM PowerNV (Non-Virtualized) POWER9
ppce500 generic paravirt e500 platform
pseries-2.1 pSeries Logical Partition (PAPR compliant)
[lots of different pseries versions omitted here]
pseries pSeries Logical Partition (PAPR compliant) (alias of
pseries-8.0)
pseries-8.0 pSeries Logical Partition (PAPR compliant) (default)
ref405ep ref405ep
sam460ex aCube Sam460ex
virtex-ml507 Xilinx Virtex ML507 reference design
It makes no sense to define it for qemu-system-ppc as that version does not have G5
and 64 bit CPUs compiled in. Cf. qemu-system-ppc -cpu help and qemu-system-ppc64 -cpu
help or target/ppc/cpu-models.c so I don't know what you're talking about.
I did a quick ask around online, and the general consensus was that it references the
target (see https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2022-05/msg00757.html for
one of the more recent discussions about this as why this isn't always clear).
However as you point out the 64-bit CPU isn't available for qemu-system-ppc so you're
right that won't be an issue here.
Secondly it's not clear to me why you've chosen names like "powermac_3_1" instead
of "g4agp"? Does powermac_3_1 uniquely identify the G4 AGP Sawtooth model? For
QEMU it is always best to emulate real machines, and whilst I understand you want
to separate out the two versions of the mac99 machine, having "powermac_X_Y"
seems less clear to me.
These machine model identifiers are used by Apple to uniquely identify (all of)
their machines since new-world Macs (even modern iPads and Macs have them) so for
Mac people this should be clearer than the informal names that could get a bit
long and confusing as there may be slight differences within a family. In any
case, qemu-system-ppc -M mac99 is not corresponding to any real Mac so I'd like
the options which do emulate real Macs to be called in a name that show which Mac
is that. For the PPC Macs there's some info here for example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Mac_G4
And everymac.com also has info on all Macs. There were actually more than one G4
PowerMac with AGP but the other one was informally called gigabit ethernet. So the
model ID is a shorter and better way to clearly identify which hardware is it (and
it's also referenced in the device-tree of these Macs).
Are you planning to work on different types of G4 Mac where this could be
confusing? Even to me "PowerMac 3.1" doesn't really tell me what model of Mac is
being emulated, whereas "g4agp" (much in the same way as g3beige) is much more
friendlier to people interested in using QEMU for Mac emulation.
This is similar problem as some people like to call Mac OS X versions by number and
some by big cats names. Personally I prefer version numbers because it's easy to tell
which is newer or older that way without remembering a nomenclature or having to look
it up every time. It would be good if others interested in this also shared their
preference because if it's only us two with different views then it's hard to make a
decision. I still think machine ID is better also because then these machines would
be grouped in the -machine help output like the others but as long as we don't have
other machines that start with a g or other Macs that have some other name it might
work so I could change the naming if that's all needed for this to get in.
I'd lean towards the g* naming, because not only is it more obvious to less technical
Mac users what is being emulated, it matches the existing precedent set by g3beige.
Finally can you post links to the device trees that you are using for each of the
new machine types so that we have a clear reference point for future changes to
the QEMU Mac machines? Even better include the links in the comments for each
machine so that the information is easily visible for developers.
I still have those I've posted over the past 8 years when I made changes to
OpenBIOS to make the device-tree closer to real machine. I've downloaded it back
then, don't know where to find it now but searching for e.g. "PowerMac3,1"
"device-tree" should get some results.
Nothing shows up for me, I'm afraid (remember that Google searches are unique to
each user). If you want argue for changing the QEMU machines, then we should agree
on the reference device model for future changes.
Sigh, maybe search your list archives instead of Googls. Also it's "PowerMac3,1"
where I've converted the comma to underscre for qemu command line parsing so became
powermac3_1 not powermac_3_1. Try searching with quotes to reduce the number of false
results.
- mac99 (via=cuda) does not exist so no real device tree for this needed
- powermac3_1 (currently mac99,via=pmu) I've sent links years ago e.g.:
https://mail.coreboot.org/pipermail/openbios/2016-February/009145.html
but you still keep asking
Right, because old documentation like this is slowly disappearing from the internet.
We should consider a patch to add those public links into the source files so there
is a (hopefully) long-term reference to them.
- powermac7_3 (ppc64 mac99) The expected hardware is listed in a comment in
mac_newworld.c also it adds a 970fx CPU and according to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Mac_G5 PowerMac7,3 was the first version with
970fx so I think that was the target for whoever started it back then. These G5 Macs
are probably still around so you should be able to ask someone to get a device tree
dump, I've only seen Linux hardware listings:
https://gist.github.com/tomari/3689297
https://forum.ubuntu-fr.org/viewtopic.php?id=2026003 (last post)
-powerbook3_2 (mac99,via=pmi-adb) this is rare as Macs with PMU usually have USB and
not ADB; only the first PowerBooks had an ADB trackpad (but no outside ports AFAIK).
All other Macs with ADB had CUDA so I'm not even sure we need this option but if we
want it then the first PowerBooks are candidates, I've picked the lowest number for
1st gen Titanium PowerBook from here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerBook_G4
and e.g. these links confirm it had ADB:
https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/12-powerbook-g4-867mhz-xorg-doesnt-work.37815/
http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,4781.msg41380.html?PHPSESSID=75b23dcb4c042b51c6dddd311cff2341#msg41380
It would be tough to come up with a name for the powerbook3_2 though as these were
called Early 2001 Titanium PowerBook G4 or code name Mercury but even Mac fanatics
probably couldn't tell that was a powerbook if you call it g4mercury so I'm open to
votes on naming but hard to be convinced there's anything simpler and more
straightforward than using machine id which is usually also listed everywhere for these.
The question really is which OSs use -M mac99,via=cuda and -M mac99,via=pmu-adb, and
what real machines were intended to boot them. Howard, perhaps you have better
knowledge of this?
ATB,
Mark.
