j
: Next unread message k
: Previous unread message j a
: Jump to all threads
j l
: Jump to MailingList overview
On 28/07/14 15:33, Artyom Tarasenko wrote:
On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Mark Cave-Ayland mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk wrote:
At the moment we are probably closest to an Ultra250 with an UltraSPARC-IIi processor and PCI bus.
Are we? I thought QEMU was targeting Ultra-5. Both Ultra-5 and Enterpise-250 have different serial ports, but Enterprise-250 may have multiple CPUs, whereas QEMU can't.
Yeah, it was something to do with the serial ports, although I suspect given the hacking over the past weekend that Ultra5 is probably still valid now.
This property is checked by NetBSD during boot.
Does it have to be something existing? Since QEMU doesn't exactly match any real machine, I'd prefer something like "QEMU,sun4u", but maybe it's personal.
I'm not exactly sure? But sure, at the very least we should have something there to prevent errors on the console during boot.
ATB,
Mark.
On 28/07/14 17:33, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
This property is checked by NetBSD during boot.
Does it have to be something existing? Since QEMU doesn't exactly match any real machine, I'd prefer something like "QEMU,sun4u", but maybe it's personal.
I'm not exactly sure? But sure, at the very least we should have something there to prevent errors on the console during boot.
FWIW I've just committed the patchset minus this one particular patch as it seems NetBSD will continue without it (so we can figure out what we would prefer to do a bit later!).
ATB,
Mark.