Re: [OpenBIOS] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH, RFC] Mac99 (CHRP?) support

[Aurelien Jarno]

On Sat, Feb 07, 2009 at 01:38:58PM +0200, Blue Swirl wrote:
> Hi,

Hi!
> This set of patches adds basic support for Mac99 Qemu machine,

As you ask the question in the subject, this machine is a NewWorld
machine, and not a CHRP one. I think we don't really want to provide a
CHRP emulated machine, so the best is probably to rename ppc_chrp.c into
ppc_newworld.c.
> provided by ppc_chrp.c. I've used the device tree of iMac DV ('99) as
> reference:
> http://penguinppc.org/historical/dev-trees-html/imac-dv-99.html
>
> The patches changes the machine to use OpenBIOS instead of OHW and
> otherwise breaks OHW assumptions. On OpenBIOS side there are still
> some missing bits.
>
> Comments welcome.

Great work.

I gave a quick look at the patches, they looks fine. However I still
experience some problem with the PowerMac IDE emulation, especially with
recent kernels, so until it is fixed (Laurent is working on that) I 
think we should keep the CMD646 as a default.

[Qemu-devel] [PATCH, RFC] Mac99 (CHRP?) support

[Blue Swirl]

On 2/7/09, Aurelien Jarno  wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 07, 2009 at 01:38:58PM +0200, Blue Swirl wrote:
> > Hi,
>
> Hi!
> > This set of patches adds basic support for Mac99 Qemu machine,
>
> As you ask the question in the subject, this machine is a NewWorld
>  machine, and not a CHRP one. I think we don't really want to provide a
>  CHRP emulated machine, so the best is probably to rename ppc_chrp.c into
>  ppc_newworld.c.

True. I think RS6000 series were closest to CHRP, not iMac.

The rename does not affect OHW status, so it could be done immediately.
> > provided by ppc_chrp.c. I've used the device tree of iMac DV ('99) as
> > reference:
> > http://penguinppc.org/historical/dev-trees-html/imac-dv-99.html
> >
> > The patches changes the machine to use OpenBIOS instead of OHW and
> > otherwise breaks OHW assumptions. On OpenBIOS side there are still
> > some missing bits.
> >
> > Comments welcome.
>
> Great work.
>
> I gave a quick look at the patches, they looks fine. However I still
>  experience some problem with the PowerMac IDE emulation, especially with
>  recent kernels, so until it is fixed (Laurent is working on that) I
>  think we should keep the CMD646 as a default.

OK¸ I'll change that part and send new patches.