[Qemu-devel] Re: target-sparc/TODO

[Blue Swirl]

On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 7:59 PM, Artyom Tarasenko
<address@hidden> wrote:
> 2010/8/19 Blue Swirl <address@hidden>:
>
>>> Is there a list of what is missing? You mentioned the pci bridges
>>> before. What else?
>>> Shall we maintain the TODO file for everything we find? Including
>>> things we may fix within a few days after finding?
>>
>> Actually, we have a TODO file, see under target-sparc. Thanks for
>> reminding me. ;-)
>
> I know that we have it. I asked you about a year ago whether the
> things in it were up to date. ;-)

Yes, but I had sort of forgotten.

> What I mean is that we should update it really every time we find or
> fix missing things. For example my current list of sun4m
> features/fixes which may or may not be implemented in the near or far
> future:
>
> - esp: improve "Select with Attention" / "Select without Attention",
> so that it's compatible with NetBSD 1.6-3.0.

bug

> - mxcc: implement missing registers so that SS-10/SS-20 OBPs would
> work with the default CPU model

bug?

> - le: improve for passing OBP loopback test. This would allow the
> network boot (which is the default option for OBP when running under
> qemu because NVRAM contents is invalid).

bug or feature, I don't know

> - nvram: add possibility to back it up with a file.

feature

> - add option rom file load for graphic card or for any SBus slot (the
> second variant is preferable because it can be used to provide SS-20
> OBP with fake or real dbri rom).

feature

> - slavio_timer: make it closer to the real HW than to specification.
> NeXTStep OS relies on register contents after the mode change although
> the documentation states it to be undefined.

bug

> - fix Solaris 2.2-2.5.1 boot hanging if the day of month is >20 (am
> currently at it).

bug?

>
> the list is unsorted. The "option rom file" point is already in the
> TODO file but without reasoning.

I think small bugs could be reported to the bugzilla and only new
features (and maybe bugs that need a big fix) should be added to TODO.

> I think one point in the current TODO is resolved:
>
> - Interrupt routing does not match real HW
>
> I think we are pretty good there at least for the single CPU machines.

This was probably from the time that CPU timer interrupts were
delivered with the IRQ bit (0x80 in the master register) that Linux
used to clear the interrupt which was not correct.

Level 15 handling may still be incorrect and as you reported, IOMMU
probably is too trigger happy with NMI which may not even be the
correct IRQ. Likewise with unassigned_mem.