On Thu, 25 Mar 2021 at 12:57, Mark Cave-Ayland
wrote:
> Thanks for the analysis: I can certainly see how the above commit would have
> changed
> the behaviour. Looking at hw/ppc/e590plat.c in e500plat_machine_class_init()
> I see
> that line 101 reads "machine_class_allow_dynamic_sysbus_dev(mc,
On 23/03/2021 22:57, Peter Maydell wrote:
On Tue, 23 Mar 2021 at 21:21, Mark Cave-Ayland
wrote:
I'm not sure what the right solution is here. In my mind there hasn't really
been any
difference between TYPE_DEVICE and TYPE_SYS_BUS_DEVICE other than the APIs that
expose the memory regions and I
On Wed, 24 Mar 2021 10:17:55 +0100
Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 24/03/21 00:35, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > Hmmm does this assert() matches your comment?
> >
> > -- >8 --
> > diff --git a/hw/core/qdev.c b/hw/core/qdev.c
> > index cefc5eaa0a9..41cbee77d14 100644
> > --- a/hw/core/qdev.c
> > ++
On 24/03/2021 11.10, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 24/03/2021 00.35, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
[...]
Hmmm does this assert() matches your comment?
-- >8 --
diff --git a/hw/core/qdev.c b/hw/core/qdev.c
index cefc5eaa0a9..41cbee77d14 100644
--- a/hw/core/qdev.c
+++ b/hw/core/qdev.c
@@ -1130,6 +1130,8
On 24/03/2021 00.35, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
[...]
Hmmm does this assert() matches your comment?
-- >8 --
diff --git a/hw/core/qdev.c b/hw/core/qdev.c
index cefc5eaa0a9..41cbee77d14 100644
--- a/hw/core/qdev.c
+++ b/hw/core/qdev.c
@@ -1130,6 +1130,8 @@ Object *qdev_get_machine(void)
{
On 24/03/21 00:35, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
Hmmm does this assert() matches your comment?
-- >8 --
diff --git a/hw/core/qdev.c b/hw/core/qdev.c
index cefc5eaa0a9..41cbee77d14 100644
--- a/hw/core/qdev.c
+++ b/hw/core/qdev.c
@@ -1130,6 +1130,8 @@ Object *qdev_get_machine(void)
{
stat
On Wed, 24 Mar 2021 00:35:05 +0100
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 3/24/21 12:00 AM, Greg Kurz wrote:
> > Cc'ing David
> >
> > On Tue, 23 Mar 2021 17:48:36 +0100
> > Thomas Huth wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> In case anyone is interested in fixing those, there are two regressions
> >> with
> >> qem
On 3/24/21 12:00 AM, Greg Kurz wrote:
> Cc'ing David
>
> On Tue, 23 Mar 2021 17:48:36 +0100
> Thomas Huth wrote:
>
>>
>> In case anyone is interested in fixing those, there are two regressions with
>> qemu-system-ppc64 in the current master branch:
>>
>> $ ./qemu-system-ppc64 -M ppce500 -device
Cc'ing David
On Tue, 23 Mar 2021 17:48:36 +0100
Thomas Huth wrote:
>
> In case anyone is interested in fixing those, there are two regressions with
> qemu-system-ppc64 in the current master branch:
>
> $ ./qemu-system-ppc64 -M ppce500 -device macio-oldworld
> qemu-system-ppc64: ../../devel/qe
On Tue, 23 Mar 2021 at 21:21, Mark Cave-Ayland
wrote:
> I'm not sure what the right solution is here. In my mind there hasn't really
> been any
> difference between TYPE_DEVICE and TYPE_SYS_BUS_DEVICE other than the APIs
> that
> expose the memory regions and IRQs are different, but clearly plat
On 23/03/2021 16:48, Thomas Huth wrote:
(adding Markus on CC for comment)
In case anyone is interested in fixing those, there are two regressions with
qemu-system-ppc64 in the current master branch:
$ ./qemu-system-ppc64 -M ppce500 -device macio-oldworld
qemu-system-ppc64: ../../devel/qemu/so
+Mark
On 3/23/21 5:48 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>
> In case anyone is interested in fixing those, there are two regressions
> with qemu-system-ppc64 in the current master branch:
>
> $ ./qemu-system-ppc64 -M ppce500 -device macio-oldworld
> qemu-system-ppc64: ../../devel/qemu/softmmu/memory.c:2443:
In case anyone is interested in fixing those, there are two regressions with
qemu-system-ppc64 in the current master branch:
$ ./qemu-system-ppc64 -M ppce500 -device macio-oldworld
qemu-system-ppc64: ../../devel/qemu/softmmu/memory.c:2443:
memory_region_add_subregion_common: Assertion `!subr
13 matches
Mail list logo
