On 7/13/23 13:18, Peter Maydell wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2023 at 18:16, Stefan Berger <stef...@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
I guess the first point would be to decide whether to support an i2c bus on the
virt board and then whether we can use the aspeed bus that we know that the
tpm_tis_i2c device model works with but we don't know how Windows may react to
it.
It seems sysbus is already supported there so ... we may have a 'match'?
You can use sysbus devices anywhere -- they're just
'anywhere' also includes aarch64 virt board I suppose.
"this is a memory mapped device". The question is whether
we should, or whether an i2c controller is more like
what the real world uses (and if so, what i2c controller).
I don't want to accept changes to the virt board that are
hard to live with in future, because changing virt in
non-backward compatible ways is painful.
Once we have the CRB sysbus device we would keep it around forever and it seems
to
- not require any changes to the virt board (iiuc) since sysbus is already
being used
- works already with Windows and probably also Linux
Stefan
-- PMM
