qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/6] Fix -kernel with SeaBIOS v2


From: Alexander Graf
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/6] Fix -kernel with SeaBIOS v2
Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 10:58:45 +0100
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817)

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 10:28:44PM +0100, Alexander Graf wrote:
>   
>>> Is this on an x86_64 box or i386?  I can boot the same kernel with
>>> upstream qemu on another box with an x86_64 kernel and qemu.
>>>       
>> I only test things on x86_64. so you're saying it breaks on an i586  
>> host?
>>     
>
> Yes, both guest and host are 32 bit.
>   

Ok I just tried to reproduce this using my netbook (32 bits only) and
your kernel:

address@hidden:~/git/qemu> uname -a
Linux linux-dpw4 2.6.27.37-0.1-pae #1 SMP 2009-10-15 14:56:58 +0200 i686
i686 i386 GNU/Linux
address@hidden:~/git/qemu> ./i386-softmmu/qemu -enable-kvm -kernel
/tmp/bzImage -append "console=ttyS0" -nographic -L pc-bios
[    0.000000] Linux version 2.6.32-rc7 (address@hidden) (gcc version 4.3.4
(Debian 4.3.4-5) ) #448 SMP Wed Nov 18 18:01:25 CET 2009
[    0.000000] KERNEL supported cpus:
[    0.000000]   Intel GenuineIntel
[    0.000000]   AMD AuthenticAMD
[    0.000000]   NSC Geode by NSC
[    0.000000]   Cyrix CyrixInstead
[    0.000000]   Centaur CentaurHauls
[    0.000000]   Transmeta GenuineTMx86
[    0.000000]   Transmeta TransmetaCPU
[    0.000000]   UMC UMC UMC UMC
[    0.000000] BIOS-provided physical RAM map:
[    0.000000]  BIOS-e820: 0000000000000000 - 000000000009f400 (usable)
[    0.000000]  BIOS-e820: 000000000009f400 - 00000000000a0000 (reserved)
[    0.000000]  BIOS-e820: 00000000000f0000 - 0000000000100000 (reserved)
[    0.000000]  BIOS-e820: 0000000000100000 - 0000000007ffd000 (usable)
[    0.000000]  BIOS-e820: 0000000007ffd000 - 0000000008000000 (reserved)
[    0.000000]  BIOS-e820: 00000000fffc0000 - 0000000100000000 (reserved)
[    0.000000] DMI 2.4 present.
...


I don't see any breakage here.


Alex




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]