[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] sifive_e: Support the revB machine
From: |
Alistair Francis |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] sifive_e: Support the revB machine |
Date: |
Thu, 21 May 2020 08:57:52 -0700 |
On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 4:08 PM Palmer Dabbelt <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 May 2020 13:47:10 PDT (-0700), Alistair Francis wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Alistair Francis <address@hidden>
> > ---
> > hw/riscv/sifive_e.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > include/hw/riscv/sifive_e.h | 1 +
> > 2 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/riscv/sifive_e.c b/hw/riscv/sifive_e.c
> > index 472a98970b..cb7818341b 100644
> > --- a/hw/riscv/sifive_e.c
> > +++ b/hw/riscv/sifive_e.c
> > @@ -98,10 +98,14 @@ static void riscv_sifive_e_init(MachineState *machine)
> > memmap[SIFIVE_E_DTIM].base, main_mem);
> >
> > /* Mask ROM reset vector */
> > - uint32_t reset_vec[2] = {
> > - 0x204002b7, /* 0x1000: lui t0,0x20400 */
> > - 0x00028067, /* 0x1004: jr t0 */
> > - };
> > + uint32_t reset_vec[2];
> > +
> > + if (s->revb) {
> > + reset_vec[0] = 0x200102b7; /* 0x1000: lui t0,0x20010 */
> > + } else {
> > + reset_vec[0] = 0x204002b7; /* 0x1000: lui t0,0x20400 */
> > + }
> > + reset_vec[1] = 0x00028067; /* 0x1004: jr t0 */
> >
> > /* copy in the reset vector in little_endian byte order */
> > for (i = 0; i < sizeof(reset_vec) >> 2; i++) {
> > @@ -115,8 +119,31 @@ static void riscv_sifive_e_init(MachineState *machine)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > +static bool sifive_e_machine_get_revb(Object *obj, Error **errp)
> > +{
> > + SiFiveEState *s = RISCV_E_MACHINE(obj);
> > +
> > + return s->revb;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void sifive_e_machine_set_revb(Object *obj, bool value, Error
> > **errp)
> > +{
> > + SiFiveEState *s = RISCV_E_MACHINE(obj);
> > +
> > + s->revb = value;
> > +}
> > +
> > static void sifive_e_machine_instance_init(Object *obj)
> > {
> > + SiFiveEState *s = RISCV_E_MACHINE(obj);
> > +
> > + s->revb = false;
> > + object_property_add_bool(obj, "revb", sifive_e_machine_get_revb,
> > + sifive_e_machine_set_revb, NULL);
> > + object_property_set_description(obj, "revb",
> > + "Set on to tell QEMU that it should
> > model "
> > + "the revB HiFive1 board",
> > + NULL);
> > }
> >
> > static void sifive_e_machine_class_init(ObjectClass *oc, void *data)
> > diff --git a/include/hw/riscv/sifive_e.h b/include/hw/riscv/sifive_e.h
> > index 414992119e..0d3cd07fcc 100644
> > --- a/include/hw/riscv/sifive_e.h
> > +++ b/include/hw/riscv/sifive_e.h
> > @@ -45,6 +45,7 @@ typedef struct SiFiveEState {
> >
> > /*< public >*/
> > SiFiveESoCState soc;
> > + bool revb;
> > } SiFiveEState;
> >
> > #define TYPE_RISCV_E_MACHINE MACHINE_TYPE_NAME("sifive_e")
>
> IIRC there are way more differences between the un-suffixed FE310 and the Rev
> B, specifically the interrupt map is all different.
The three IRQs that QEMU uses for the SiFive E (UART0, UART1 and GPIO)
all seem to be the same.
Alistair