A recent patch to QEMU that allows sun4m machines to be launched with -vga none revealed a crash on startup due to the missing framebuffer.
Signed-off-by: Mark Cave-Ayland mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk
Mark Cave-Ayland (2): sbus: don't use internal fallback TCX driver with QEMU SPARC32: use serial console when QEMU is launched with -vga none
arch/sparc32/init.fs | 7 +++++-- arch/sparc32/openbios.c | 8 ++++++++ drivers/sbus.c | 11 +++++++++++ 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
OpenBIOS SPARC32 has always maintained a fallback option of an internal TCX driver if an FCode driver cannot be located on the TCX card itself.
Since QEMU's TCX adapter has supported FCode payloads for a long time then we only require this logic for non-QEMU builds. Otherwise we unintentionally install the fallback driver and device node even if the framebuffer card hasn't been installed into the machine.
Signed-off-by: Mark Cave-Ayland mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk --- arch/sparc32/init.fs | 7 +++++-- drivers/sbus.c | 11 +++++++++++ 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/sparc32/init.fs b/arch/sparc32/init.fs index 814c720..5e8805b 100644 --- a/arch/sparc32/init.fs +++ b/arch/sparc32/init.fs @@ -78,6 +78,9 @@ defer ignore-dfault
\ Load TCX FCode driver blob [IFDEF] CONFIG_DRIVER_SBUS - -1 value tcx-driver-fcode - " QEMU,tcx.bin" $encode-file to tcx-driver-fcode + [IFDEF] CONFIG_QEMU + [ELSE] + -1 value tcx-driver-fcode + " QEMU,tcx.bin" $encode-file to tcx-driver-fcode + [THEN] [THEN] diff --git a/drivers/sbus.c b/drivers/sbus.c index 9cce89f..d59963e 100644 --- a/drivers/sbus.c +++ b/drivers/sbus.c @@ -138,6 +138,7 @@ ob_le_init(unsigned int slot, uint64_t base, unsigned long leoffset, unsigned lo
uint16_t graphic_depth;
+#if !defined(CONFIG_QEMU) static void ob_tcx_init(unsigned int slot, const char *path) { @@ -162,6 +163,7 @@ ob_tcx_init(unsigned int slot, const char *path) /* Restore */ feval("to my-self active-package!"); } +#endif
static void ob_apc_init(unsigned int slot, unsigned long base) @@ -298,9 +300,12 @@ sbus_probe_slot_ss5(unsigned int slot, uint64_t base) }
switch(slot) { +#if !defined(CONFIG_QEMU) + /* QEMU always uses the FCode driver */ case 3: // SUNW,tcx ob_tcx_init(slot, "/iommu/sbus/SUNW,tcx"); break; +#endif case 4: // SUNW,CS4231 ob_cs4231_init(slot); @@ -327,9 +332,12 @@ sbus_probe_slot_ss10(unsigned int slot, uint64_t base) }
switch(slot) { +#if !defined(CONFIG_QEMU) + /* QEMU always uses the FCode driver */ case 2: // SUNW,tcx ob_tcx_init(slot, "/iommu/sbus/SUNW,tcx"); break; +#endif case 0xf: // le, esp, bpp, power-management ob_macio_init(slot, base, 0); // Power management (APC) XXX should not exist @@ -352,9 +360,12 @@ sbus_probe_slot_ss600mp(unsigned int slot, uint64_t base) }
switch(slot) { +#if !defined(CONFIG_QEMU) + /* QEMU always uses the FCode driver */ case 2: // SUNW,tcx ob_tcx_init(slot, "/iommu/sbus/SUNW,tcx"); break; +#endif case 0xf: // le, esp, bpp, power-management #ifdef CONFIG_DRIVER_ESP ob_esp_init(slot, base, SS600MP_ESP, SS600MP_ESPDMA);
On Wed, 12 Jun 2019, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
OpenBIOS SPARC32 has always maintained a fallback option of an internal TCX driver if an FCode driver cannot be located on the TCX card itself.
Since QEMU's TCX adapter has supported FCode payloads for a long time then we only require this logic for non-QEMU builds. Otherwise we unintentionally install the fallback driver and device node even if the framebuffer card hasn't been installed into the machine.
Signed-off-by: Mark Cave-Ayland mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk
arch/sparc32/init.fs | 7 +++++-- drivers/sbus.c | 11 +++++++++++ 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/sparc32/init.fs b/arch/sparc32/init.fs index 814c720..5e8805b 100644 --- a/arch/sparc32/init.fs +++ b/arch/sparc32/init.fs @@ -78,6 +78,9 @@ defer ignore-dfault
\ Load TCX FCode driver blob [IFDEF] CONFIG_DRIVER_SBUS
- -1 value tcx-driver-fcode
- " QEMU,tcx.bin" $encode-file to tcx-driver-fcode
- [IFDEF] CONFIG_QEMU
- [ELSE]
- -1 value tcx-driver-fcode
- " QEMU,tcx.bin" $encode-file to tcx-driver-fcode
- [THEN]
[THEN]
It looks strange that the driver is called QEMU,tcx but is not used on QEMU. Does it make sense to use it when not in QEMU at all? Should it be completely removed instead or maybe renamed to some other name when it's not related to QEMU any more?
Also the commit message says that the problem is that driver should not be installed when TCX hardware is not present so maybe you should test for hardware presence instead of QEMU or not which may be the wrong conditional to decide if the driver is needed or not if I got this correctly.
(But it's possible I haven't understood something in which case just disregard my comment.)
Regards, BALATON Zoltan
On 13/06/2019 10:30, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jun 2019, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
OpenBIOS SPARC32 has always maintained a fallback option of an internal TCX driver if an FCode driver cannot be located on the TCX card itself.
Since QEMU's TCX adapter has supported FCode payloads for a long time then we only require this logic for non-QEMU builds. Otherwise we unintentionally install the fallback driver and device node even if the framebuffer card hasn't been installed into the machine.
Signed-off-by: Mark Cave-Ayland mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk
arch/sparc32/init.fs | 7 +++++-- drivers/sbus.c | 11 +++++++++++ 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/sparc32/init.fs b/arch/sparc32/init.fs index 814c720..5e8805b 100644 --- a/arch/sparc32/init.fs +++ b/arch/sparc32/init.fs @@ -78,6 +78,9 @@ defer ignore-dfault
\ Load TCX FCode driver blob [IFDEF] CONFIG_DRIVER_SBUS - -1 value tcx-driver-fcode - " QEMU,tcx.bin" $encode-file to tcx-driver-fcode + [IFDEF] CONFIG_QEMU + [ELSE] + -1 value tcx-driver-fcode + " QEMU,tcx.bin" $encode-file to tcx-driver-fcode + [THEN] [THEN]
It looks strange that the driver is called QEMU,tcx but is not used on QEMU. Does it make sense to use it when not in QEMU at all? Should it be completely removed instead or maybe renamed to some other name when it's not related to QEMU any more?
The driver is still used in QEMU, it's just that the image is memory-mapped into the TCX card address space by QEMU where it is located and executed during SBus probe (QEMU contains its own copy of QEMU,tcx.bin in the pc-bios directory).
Also the commit message says that the problem is that driver should not be installed when TCX hardware is not present so maybe you should test for hardware presence instead of QEMU or not which may be the wrong conditional to decide if the driver is needed or not if I got this correctly.
(But it's possible I haven't understood something in which case just disregard my comment.)
The problem here is that the fallback works by "executing" an in-built copy of the FCode if a valid ROM can't be located during the SBus probe. But with -vga none this causes issues because it is the FCode that generates the TCX device node, and so you end up with the case where the DT node exists yet the underlying hardware isn't there and so things rapidly start to go downhill...
ATB,
Mark.
On Thu, 13 Jun 2019, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
On 13/06/2019 10:30, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jun 2019, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
OpenBIOS SPARC32 has always maintained a fallback option of an internal TCX driver if an FCode driver cannot be located on the TCX card itself.
Since QEMU's TCX adapter has supported FCode payloads for a long time then we only require this logic for non-QEMU builds. Otherwise we unintentionally install the fallback driver and device node even if the framebuffer card hasn't been installed into the machine.
Signed-off-by: Mark Cave-Ayland mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk
arch/sparc32/init.fs |? 7 +++++-- drivers/sbus.c?????? | 11 +++++++++++ 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/sparc32/init.fs b/arch/sparc32/init.fs index 814c720..5e8805b 100644 --- a/arch/sparc32/init.fs +++ b/arch/sparc32/init.fs @@ -78,6 +78,9 @@ defer ignore-dfault
\ Load TCX FCode driver blob [IFDEF] CONFIG_DRIVER_SBUS -? -1 value tcx-driver-fcode -? " QEMU,tcx.bin" $encode-file to tcx-driver-fcode +? [IFDEF] CONFIG_QEMU +? [ELSE] +??? -1 value tcx-driver-fcode +??? " QEMU,tcx.bin" $encode-file to tcx-driver-fcode +? [THEN] [THEN]
It looks strange that the driver is called QEMU,tcx but is not used on QEMU. Does it make sense to use it when not in QEMU at all? Should it be completely removed instead or maybe renamed to some other name when it's not related to QEMU any more?
The driver is still used in QEMU, it's just that the image is memory-mapped into the TCX card address space by QEMU where it is located and executed during SBus probe (QEMU contains its own copy of QEMU,tcx.bin in the pc-bios directory).
So the driver copy from QEMU is used not this one. They may be identical but if I got that right this driver is now only used when not using QEMU and with QEMU the one from QEMU is used not this driver. That's what I meant by saying this driver is not used in QEMU as this one is not used but an identical copy from QEMU.
Since according to its name this is a QEMU driver this looks strange. Either the driver is not QEMU specific and would work with real hardware so it makes sense to install it when not using QEMU but then maybe it could be renamed to not have QEMU in its name or at least put a comment somewhere saying that this is a copy of QEMU's driver for the case when QEMU is not available.
Or this driver is QEMU specific in which case it does not make sense to use it when QEMU is not available.
Also the commit message says that the problem is that driver should not be installed when TCX hardware is not present so maybe you should test for hardware presence instead of QEMU or not which may be the wrong conditional to decide if the driver is needed or not if I got this correctly.
(But it's possible I haven't understood something in which case just disregard my comment.)
The problem here is that the fallback works by "executing" an in-built copy of the FCode if a valid ROM can't be located during the SBus probe. But with -vga none this causes issues because it is the FCode that generates the TCX device node, and so you end up with the case where the DT node exists yet the underlying hardware isn't there and so things rapidly start to go downhill...
Is this driver installed on real hardware because OpenBIOS cannot run the FCode ROM of the card so this is used as a fallback instead? Or what is a valid ROM? With testing for QEMU instead of hardware presence wouldn't you get the same problem on real hardware: driver would be installed even without card present? (Of course OpenBIOS probably only works with QEMU and likely nobody uses it on real hardware so this is theoretical but testing for QEMU still does not look like the right thing to do here.) I can see two ways:
1. If QEMU always supplies the driver as card ROM which will then be installed, when is this fallback necessary at all? Wouldn't it be simpler to just remove it altogether? On QEMU it's not needed, other configs probably don't work anyway and if they worked you may get the same problem as in the QEMU case before this patch when card is missing so getting rid of this fallback would simplify code and may only break real hardware case which is likely already broken anyway.
or
2. If you think fallback still makes sense and is used by some real case then the correct test may be to check if TCX card is present or not, not if running on QEMU or not. Maybe you should do this when setting up the card during sbus scan. The drivers/sbus.c seems to create device nodes when some slots are occupied (? is this correct? are these cards hardwired to these slots or what if they are not in the expected slot or something else is there). Anyway, you could check if these nodes are existing but ROM is not valid to decide to install the driver fallback which seems more correct. Or you could try to fall back when mapping the ROM or interpreting it has failed.
But I think a proper fix for the problem would be to fix FCode ROM support instead of adding fallbacks for everything. This reminds me of the QEMU VGA ndrv fallback which is also installed for every VGA device regardless if it works with them or not and I had to disable it to try a card ROM or driver with the ati-vga device. Along the same lines, that fallback (and the fw_cfg hack to download the driver) could also be removed if QEMU set the card ROM to the ndrv but the problem with that is that this is the std vga device and we would need to patch ROM only when this is used in a ppc mac emulation for which there're no functions in QEMU yet. But changing QEMU to allow board code to specify card ROM may be cleaner than the current way of patching in the ndrv for all vga devices and that would allow removing a lot of hacks from OpenBIOS: the fw_cfg download, ndrv installation and vga-ndrv? switch and would make it simpler until proper FCode support could be implemented some time later.
I hope at least some of what I said makes sense.
Regards, BALATON Zoltan
On 13/06/2019 21:01, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
The problem here is that the fallback works by "executing" an in-built copy of the FCode if a valid ROM can't be located during the SBus probe. But with -vga none this causes issues because it is the FCode that generates the TCX device node, and so you end up with the case where the DT node exists yet the underlying hardware isn't there and so things rapidly start to go downhill...
Is this driver installed on real hardware because OpenBIOS cannot run the FCode ROM of the card so this is used as a fallback instead? Or what is a valid ROM? With testing for QEMU instead of hardware presence wouldn't you get the same problem on real hardware: driver would be installed even without card present? (Of course OpenBIOS probably only works with QEMU and likely nobody uses it on real hardware so this is theoretical but testing for QEMU still does not look like the right thing to do here.) I can see two ways:
Right. I decided to do this for 2 reasons: firstly it would mean no change in behaviour for other projects that use OpenBIOS (e.g. temlib) and secondly during the transition then it would allow newer OpenBIOS binaries to be tested on older QEMU versions.
- If QEMU always supplies the driver as card ROM which will then be installed, when
is this fallback necessary at all? Wouldn't it be simpler to just remove it altogether? On QEMU it's not needed, other configs probably don't work anyway and if they worked you may get the same problem as in the QEMU case before this patch when card is missing so getting rid of this fallback would simplify code and may only break real hardware case which is likely already broken anyway.
or
- If you think fallback still makes sense and is used by some real case then the
correct test may be to check if TCX card is present or not, not if running on QEMU or not. Maybe you should do this when setting up the card during sbus scan. The drivers/sbus.c seems to create device nodes when some slots are occupied (? is this correct? are these cards hardwired to these slots or what if they are not in the expected slot or something else is there). Anyway, you could check if these nodes are existing but ROM is not valid to decide to install the driver fallback which seems more correct. Or you could try to fall back when mapping the ROM or interpreting it has failed.
And this patchset implements option 1 :)
But I think a proper fix for the problem would be to fix FCode ROM support instead of adding fallbacks for everything. This reminds me of the QEMU VGA ndrv fallback which is also installed for every VGA device regardless if it works with them or not and I had to disable it to try a card ROM or driver with the ati-vga device. Along the same lines, that fallback (and the fw_cfg hack to download the driver) could also be removed if QEMU set the card ROM to the ndrv but the problem with that is that this is the std vga device and we would need to patch ROM only when this is used in a ppc mac emulation for which there're no functions in QEMU yet. But changing QEMU to allow board code to specify card ROM may be cleaner than the current way of patching in the ndrv for all vga devices and that would allow removing a lot of hacks from OpenBIOS: the fw_cfg download, ndrv installation and vga-ndrv? switch and would make it simpler until proper FCode support could be implemented some time later.
I hope at least some of what I said makes sense.
Indeed, although this is a little off-topic since SBus used by SPARC is separate from PCI. Note that you can disable the VGA ndrv driver via -prom-env 'vga-ndrv?=false' on the command line if you need it for testing.
It is already possible to provide an option ROM to the VGA device in QEMU, the slightly tricky part is that you need to add some routines to QEMU to dynamically create the option ROM by creating a "dummy" option ROM header and then injecting the FCode payload. Then it should just be a case of mapping to ROM into the PCI device, applying a small patch to OpenBIOS and then you should be good.
ATB,
Mark.
On Fri, 14 Jun 2019, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
On 13/06/2019 21:01, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
- If QEMU always supplies the driver as card ROM which will then be installed, when
is this fallback necessary at all? Wouldn't it be simpler to just remove it altogether? On QEMU it's not needed, other configs probably don't work anyway and if they worked you may get the same problem as in the QEMU case before this patch when card is missing so getting rid of this fallback would simplify code and may only break real hardware case which is likely already broken anyway.
or
- If you think fallback still makes sense and is used by some real case then the
correct test may be to check if TCX card is present or not, not if running on QEMU or not. Maybe you should do this when setting up the card during sbus scan. The drivers/sbus.c seems to create device nodes when some slots are occupied (? is this correct? are these cards hardwired to these slots or what if they are not in the expected slot or something else is there). Anyway, you could check if these nodes are existing but ROM is not valid to decide to install the driver fallback which seems more correct. Or you could try to fall back when mapping the ROM or interpreting it has failed.
And this patchset implements option 1 :)
Sort of, but instead of removing the fall back altogether and thus simplifying code it only disables it on QEMU which does not get rid of the the code but makes it even harder to follow by having a QEMU driver now only used when not on QEMU. So maybe a comment would be useful to explain this at least. If this work around is still useful for Temlib then that's a valid use case that might justify keeping it but otherwise I'd be for simpifyng code instead of keeping around now unused and unneeded hacks that may have helped in the past but now just makes it more difficult to follow the code. (Mixing different QEMU and OpenBIOS versions may not be a frequent use case either and may not work due to changes in fw_cfg anyway.) So if there's nothing left needing it any more it would be better to remove such fall backs/work arounds, rather than keep everything in fear of breaking some theoretical use case as that results in more and more complex code.
But that's just my view and I don't really mind either way, so don't take this as saying not to apply your patches.
But I think a proper fix for the problem would be to fix FCode ROM support instead of adding fallbacks for everything. This reminds me of the QEMU VGA ndrv fallback which is also installed for every VGA device regardless if it works with them or not and I had to disable it to try a card ROM or driver with the ati-vga device. Along the same lines, that fallback (and the fw_cfg hack to download the driver) could also be removed if QEMU set the card ROM to the ndrv but the problem with that is that this is the std vga device and we would need to patch ROM only when this is used in a ppc mac emulation for which there're no functions in QEMU yet. But changing QEMU to allow board code to specify card ROM may be cleaner than the current way of patching in the ndrv for all vga devices and that would allow removing a lot of hacks from OpenBIOS: the fw_cfg download, ndrv installation and vga-ndrv? switch and would make it simpler until proper FCode support could be implemented some time later.
I hope at least some of what I said makes sense.
Indeed, although this is a little off-topic since SBus used by SPARC is separate from PCI. Note that you can disable the VGA ndrv driver via -prom-env 'vga-ndrv?=false' on the command line if you need it for testing.
Yes, this is off-topic but I was reminded of this as this is similar problem and that's what I've done as explained at the end of this page:
https://osdn.net/projects/qmiga/wiki/SubprojectAti
It is already possible to provide an option ROM to the VGA device in QEMU, the slightly tricky part is that you need to add some routines to QEMU to dynamically create the option ROM by creating a "dummy" option ROM header and then injecting the FCode payload. Then it should just be a case of mapping to ROM into the PCI device, applying a small patch to OpenBIOS and then you should be good.
I've found that FCode ROMs don't work but vga_config_cb() in openbios/drivers/pci.c seems to have other workarounds which installs an NDRV or a driver executable directly supplied as a card ROM where MacOS expects them. This is the same as how the QEMU,ndrv.bin hack installs the driver in openbios/drivers/vga.fs so the latter may not be needed if QEMU would supply QEMU,ndrv.bin as the card ROM. This is what I meant above and I think I've tried to explain this before but not sure we're on the same page yet.
I don't think we need to create option ROM in QEMU (expecially no FCode header would be needed as FCode ROMs don't work anyway), we just need a way to set the card ROM to QEMU,ndrv.bin when the card is in a mac_oldworld or mac_newworld machine. We can set option rom with romfile but that's for the card globally and not for the machine so we can't use that because the pc machines still need the vgabios option ROM, only mac machines need different ROM. But there seem to be no way to set it when the card is created through the -vga option. Maybe if the board code could set the property of the card before realizing it somehow that could work but I don't know how to do that and could not figure out an easy way last I've looked at it.
Regards, BALATON Zoltan
On 14/06/2019 21:42, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jun 2019, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
On 13/06/2019 21:01, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
- If QEMU always supplies the driver as card ROM which will then be installed, when
is this fallback necessary at all? Wouldn't it be simpler to just remove it altogether? On QEMU it's not needed, other configs probably don't work anyway and if they worked you may get the same problem as in the QEMU case before this patch when card is missing so getting rid of this fallback would simplify code and may only break real hardware case which is likely already broken anyway.
or
- If you think fallback still makes sense and is used by some real case then the
correct test may be to check if TCX card is present or not, not if running on QEMU or not. Maybe you should do this when setting up the card during sbus scan. The drivers/sbus.c seems to create device nodes when some slots are occupied (? is this correct? are these cards hardwired to these slots or what if they are not in the expected slot or something else is there). Anyway, you could check if these nodes are existing but ROM is not valid to decide to install the driver fallback which seems more correct. Or you could try to fall back when mapping the ROM or interpreting it has failed.
And this patchset implements option 1 :)
Sort of, but instead of removing the fall back altogether and thus simplifying code it only disables it on QEMU which does not get rid of the the code but makes it even harder to follow by having a QEMU driver now only used when not on QEMU. So maybe a comment would be useful to explain this at least. If this work around is still useful for Temlib then that's a valid use case that might justify keeping it but otherwise I'd be for simpifyng code instead of keeping around now unused and unneeded hacks that may have helped in the past but now just makes it more difficult to follow the code. (Mixing different QEMU and OpenBIOS versions may not be a frequent use case either and may not work due to changes in fw_cfg anyway.) So if there's nothing left needing it any more it would be better to remove such fall backs/work arounds, rather than keep everything in fear of breaking some theoretical use case as that results in more and more complex code.
But that's just my view and I don't really mind either way, so don't take this as saying not to apply your patches.
Thanks for the feedback. Having reflected on this over the past week, I'm still happy with the approach taken (since it's consistent with what I've been doing for a while now) and given that it's coming up to QEMU freeze I'd like to have the fix included in the next release. So this is now pushed to master.
ATB,
Mark.
On Wed, 26 Jun 2019, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
On 14/06/2019 21:42, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
But that's just my view and I don't really mind either way, so don't take this as saying not to apply your patches.
Thanks for the feedback. Having reflected on this over the past week, I'm still happy with the approach taken (since it's consistent with what I've been doing for a while now) and given that it's coming up to QEMU freeze I'd like to have the fix included in the next release. So this is now pushed to master.
Apropos freeze, is there a chance to include my patch as well:
https://mail.coreboot.org/hyperkitty/list/openbios@openbios.org/thread/JXPLQ...
which is needed to run MorphOS on mac99 and have working USB? I have a patched OpenBIOS binary on my QEMU Amiga page which I haven't updated for a while so it may stop working at some point with newer QEMU releases. So having this in official OpenBIOS that comes with QEMU would simplify things for users. Unless there's something that breaks with it it's not worse than the other work arounds already in OpenBIOS IMO.
Regards, BALATON Zoltan
On 26/06/2019 21:59, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jun 2019, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
On 14/06/2019 21:42, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
But that's just my view and I don't really mind either way, so don't take this as saying not to apply your patches.
Thanks for the feedback. Having reflected on this over the past week, I'm still happy with the approach taken (since it's consistent with what I've been doing for a while now) and given that it's coming up to QEMU freeze I'd like to have the fix included in the next release. So this is now pushed to master.
Apropos freeze, is there a chance to include my patch as well:
https://mail.coreboot.org/hyperkitty/list/openbios@openbios.org/thread/JXPLQ...
which is needed to run MorphOS on mac99 and have working USB? I have a patched OpenBIOS binary on my QEMU Amiga page which I haven't updated for a while so it may stop working at some point with newer QEMU releases. So having this in official OpenBIOS that comes with QEMU would simplify things for users. Unless there's something that breaks with it it's not worse than the other work arounds already in OpenBIOS IMO.
From what I can see there is no follow-up patch to deal with fixing up bus-range for subsequent PCI buses? Whilst I agree with you that OpenBIOS does have a fair number of workarounds, I don't want to introduce something that deliberately breaks the conformance of the DT to the specifications when the existing code makes considerable efforts to do the right thing.
ATB,
Mark.
On Fri, 28 Jun 2019, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
On 26/06/2019 21:59, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
https://mail.coreboot.org/hyperkitty/list/openbios@openbios.org/thread/JXPLQ...
which is needed to run MorphOS on mac99 and have working USB? I have a patched OpenBIOS binary on my QEMU Amiga page which I haven't updated for a while so it may stop working at some point with newer QEMU releases. So having this in official OpenBIOS that comes with QEMU would simplify things for users. Unless there's something that breaks with it it's not worse than the other work arounds already in OpenBIOS IMO.
From what I can see there is no follow-up patch to deal with fixing up bus-range for subsequent PCI buses? Whilst I agree with you that OpenBIOS does have a fair number of workarounds, I don't want to introduce something that deliberately breaks the conformance of the DT to the specifications when the existing code makes considerable efforts to do the right thing.
I've sent a v5 to the list which also patches bus-range of second pci bus to match a PowerMac3,1 device tree. It works with MorphOS both ways as long as /pci@f0000000 is present and is before /pci@f2000000 (I don't think MorphOS considers bus-range property just reads these sequentially). I think adding this missing pci bus also fixes the bus-master bit for the network cards that needed a hack in OpenBIOS to work so those work arounds could be reverted now too but I haven't tested that.
Regards, BALATON Zoltan
If no display device has been installed in the DT e.g. passing -vga none into the QEMU command line then fall back to using the serial console as already occurs when launching QEMU in -nographic mode.
Signed-off-by: Mark Cave-Ayland mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk --- arch/sparc32/openbios.c | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/sparc32/openbios.c b/arch/sparc32/openbios.c index 78005e0..9ec28bf 100644 --- a/arch/sparc32/openbios.c +++ b/arch/sparc32/openbios.c @@ -758,8 +758,16 @@ static void setup_stdio(void) { char nographic; const char *stdin, *stdout; + phandle_t display_ph;
fw_cfg_read(FW_CFG_NOGRAPHIC, &nographic, 1); + + /* Check to see if any framebuffer present */ + display_ph = dt_iterate_type(0, "display"); + if (display_ph == 0) { + nographic = 1; + } + if (nographic) { obp_stdin = PROMDEV_TTYA; obp_stdout = PROMDEV_TTYA;
-
BALATON Zoltan -
Mark Cave-Ayland