Re: [Qemu-ppc] [PATCH] target-ppc: Remove vestigial PowerPC 620 support (v2)

[Alexander Graf]

On 12.02.2013, at 23:16, Alexander Graf wrote:

> 
> On 12.02.2013, at 11:23, Andreas Färber wrote:
> 
>> Am 12.02.2013 03:16, schrieb David Gibson:
>>> The PowerPC 620 was the very first 64-bit PowerPC implementation, but
>>> hardly anyone ever actually used the chips.  qemu notionally supports the
>>> 620, but since we don't actually have code to implement the segment table,
>>> the support is broken (quite likely in other ways too).
>>> 
>>> This partch, therefore, removes all remaining pieces of 620 support, to
>>> stop it cluttering up the platforms we actually care about.
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: David Gibson <address@hidden>
>>> ---
>>> v2: Don't remove the POWERPC_DEF()s from the table, just move them under
>>> #ifdef(TODO) to document the CPU's existence and aliases.
>> [...]
>>> diff --git a/target-ppc/translate_init.c b/target-ppc/translate_init.c
>>> index 6cebaa1..1d2e842 100644
>>> --- a/target-ppc/translate_init.c
>>> +++ b/target-ppc/translate_init.c
>> [...]
>>> @@ -9244,11 +9000,11 @@ static const ppc_def_t ppc_defs[] = {
>>>    POWERPC_DEF("7457A_v1.2",    CPU_POWERPC_74x7A_v12,              7455),
>>>    /* 64 bits PowerPC                                                       
>>> */
>>> #if defined (TARGET_PPC64)
>>> +#if defined (TODO)
>> 
>> checkpatch.pl will surely complain about the space, and elsewhere the
>> #ifs are repeated per model/family. I.e., I would've expected one new
>> pair of #if defined(TODO) and #endif around the two 620 definitions. Or
>> does the already-TODO 630 model depend on the 620 code despite type 630?
>> 
>>>    /* PowerPC 620                                                           
>>> */
>>>    POWERPC_DEF("620",           CPU_POWERPC_620,                    620),
>>>    /* Code name for PowerPC 620                                             
>>> */
>>>    POWERPC_DEF("Trident",       CPU_POWERPC_620,                    620),
>>> -#if defined (TODO)
>>>    /* PowerPC 630 (POWER3)                                                  
>>> */
>>>    POWERPC_DEF("630",           CPU_POWERPC_630,                    630),
>>>    POWERPC_DEF("POWER3",        CPU_POWERPC_630,                    630),
>> [snip]
>> 
>> I've CC'ed you on the patchset that Alex and me had been preparing.
>> Let's leave it to Alex how to proceed with the conflicting patches.
> 
> I would like to get the QOM'ification through first, then declare 620 as 
> unsupported.
> 
> David, I think the best way to proceed here would be to not touch anything in 
> translate_init.c in your MMU cleanup patch set :). Or wouldn't that work?

Eh - you aren't touching anything there. It's all about this patch :). Oops.

Then yes, QOM first.


Alex