[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu FreeBSD/sparc64 host - a bit of debugging
From: |
Juergen Lock |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu FreeBSD/sparc64 host - a bit of debugging |
Date: |
Tue, 19 Jul 2011 20:42:08 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 10:58:58PM -0400, Super Bisquit wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 2:22 PM, Juergen Lock <address@hidden>wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > I'm the FreeBSD qemu port maintainer and don't have a sparc64 box
> > myself, but Jashank Jeremy (Cc'd) now was so kind to test qemu 0.14.1
> > on a FreeBSD/sparc64 box booting a FreeBSD 8/i386 install iso using
> > i386-softmmu
>
>
> What's the difference- an honest question- between this and a normal qemu
> boot?
>
Depends on what you mean by normal qemu boot... If you are wondering
about the i386-softmmu, that's just the name of the 32bit x86 system
emulation target, the executable is called qemu. So he ran something
like:
qemu -cdrom FreeBSD-8.2-i386-bootonly.iso -vnc ...
> > and we found two things:
> >
> > 1. The hang people have been reporting seems to be caused by this tb:
> >
> > IN:
> > 0x000e7a31: in $0xb3,%al
> > 0x000e7a33: test %al,%al
> > 0x000e7a35: jne 0xe7a31
> >
> > i.e. it (the qemu bios I suppose) is waiting for x86 ioport 0xb3
> > to become zero. This port is #defined in hw/apm.c as:
> >
> > qemu-0.14.1/hw/apm.c:#define APM_STS_IOPORT 0xb3
> >
> > but the definition seems to be used nowhere in that source file.
> > Anyone have an idea why this port is never zero on sparc64 hosts
> > but seems to be on others? (endian issue? uninitialized variable?)
> >
> Have you asked Whitehorn what it my be?
>
No but I can Cc him... Actually I can Cc the freebsd-sparc64 list too.
> >
> > 2. Booting the same guest with -no-acpi gets further, bios and
> > bootloader messages are printed until it hangs again, this
> > time while handling a guest irq 8 which seems to be rtc.
> >
>
> Is there a way of disabling the clock? If not, then would it be useful to
> set the emulated cpu speed?
>
I don't think any of these two are possible.
> >
> > Maybe this is useful to some... :)
> >
>
> Actually, it's quite useful to me.
That's good to hear. :)
Juergen