[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v10 0/3] hw/riscv: handle kernel_entry high bits with 32bit C
|
From: |
Conor Dooley |
|
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v10 0/3] hw/riscv: handle kernel_entry high bits with 32bit CPUs |
|
Date: |
Thu, 2 Feb 2023 18:46:52 +0000 |
On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 03:37:17PM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
> On 2/2/23 14:25, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 02, 2023 at 10:58:07AM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
> > > This new version removed the translate_fn() from patch 1 because it
> > > wasn't removing the sign-extension for pentry as we thought it would.
> > > A more detailed explanation is given in the commit msg of patch 1.
> > >
> > > We're now retrieving the 'lowaddr' value from load_elf_ram_sym() and
> > > using it when we're running a 32-bit CPU. This worked with 32 bit
> > > 'virt' machine booting with the -kernel option.
> > >
> > > If this approach doesn't work for the Xvisor use case, IMO we should
> > > just filter kernel_load_addr bits directly as we were doing a handful of
> > > versions ago.
> > >
> > > Patches are based on current riscv-to-apply.next.
> > >
> > > Changes from v9:
> > > - patch 1:
> > > - removed the translate_fn() callback
> > > - return 'kernel_low' when running a 32-bit CPU
> > > - v9 link:
> > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2023-01/msg04509.html
> >
> > I think my T-b got lost last time around, but I gave this version a
> > whirl too & things are working for me as they were before on Icicle.
>
> That was my bad. I forgot to add the test-by after doing the changes for
> the next version.
Oh, I'm sorry. I saw a new version of the series a few days ago and
noticed the missing tags, and then saw this one today, touching MPFS,
and conflated the two.
> But I don't think this is the series you're talking about. The tested-by tag
> you gave was on these patches:
>
> "[PATCH v5 0/3] riscv_load_fdt() semantics change"
>
> I believe you can add a Tested-by there. And feel free to give it a go - the
> patches are on riscv-to-apply.next already.
Tested-by stands here though, I replied to the same message-id that I
shazamed and tried ;)
And I did so on top of the HEAD of riscv-to-apply.next, so I am happy
with the version that got applied too.
Sorry!
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- Re: [PATCH v10 1/3] hw/riscv: handle 32 bit CPUs kernel_addr in riscv_load_kernel(), (continued)
[PATCH v10 2/3] hw/riscv/boot.c: consolidate all kernel init in riscv_load_kernel(), Daniel Henrique Barboza, 2023/02/02
[PATCH v10 3/3] hw/riscv/boot.c: make riscv_load_initrd() static, Daniel Henrique Barboza, 2023/02/02
Re: [PATCH v10 0/3] hw/riscv: handle kernel_entry high bits with 32bit CPUs, Conor Dooley, 2023/02/02