Message ID | 20180307205427.3A2877456C6@zero.eik.bme.hu |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | ppc440_pcix: Add dummy implementation of BRDGOPT registers | expand |
On 07.03.2018 21:43, BALATON Zoltan wrote: > I don't know what should be the correct implementation for these so > these are just stored and returned as is without doing anything for > now only to silence warnings when u-boot accesses these registers. > > Signed-off-by: BALATON Zoltan <balaton@eik.bme.hu> > --- > hw/ppc/ppc440_pcix.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/hw/ppc/ppc440_pcix.c b/hw/ppc/ppc440_pcix.c > index ab2626a..3f177d3 100644 > --- a/hw/ppc/ppc440_pcix.c > +++ b/hw/ppc/ppc440_pcix.c > @@ -55,6 +55,8 @@ typedef struct PPC440PCIXState { > PCIDevice *dev; > struct PLBOutMap pom[PPC440_PCIX_NR_POMS]; > struct PLBInMap pim[PPC440_PCIX_NR_PIMS]; > + uint32_t brdgopt1; > + uint32_t brdgopt2; > uint32_t sts; > qemu_irq irq[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > AddressSpace bm_as; > @@ -95,6 +97,8 @@ typedef struct PPC440PCIXState { > #define PCIX0_PIM0SAH 0xf8 > #define PCIX0_PIM2SAH 0xfc > > +#define PCIX0_BRDGOPT1 0x40 > +#define PCIX0_BRDGOPT2 0x44 > #define PCIX0_STS 0xe0 > > #define PCI_ALL_SIZE (PPC440_REG_BASE + PPC440_REG_SIZE) > @@ -270,6 +274,12 @@ static void ppc440_pcix_reg_write4(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, > ppc440_pcix_update_pim(s, 2); > break; > > + case PCIX0_BRDGOPT1: > + s->brdgopt1 = val; > + break; > + case PCIX0_BRDGOPT2: > + s->brdgopt2 = val; > + break; > case PCIX0_STS: > s->sts = val; > break; > @@ -365,6 +375,12 @@ static uint64_t ppc440_pcix_reg_read4(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, > val = s->pim[2].la >> 32; > break; > > + case PCIX0_BRDGOPT1: > + val = s->brdgopt1; > + break; > + case PCIX0_BRDGOPT2: > + val = s->brdgopt2; > + break; > case PCIX0_STS: > val = s->sts; > break; > @@ -408,6 +424,8 @@ static void ppc440_pcix_reset(DeviceState *dev) > for (i = 0; i < PPC440_PCIX_NR_PIMS; i++) { > s->pim[i].sa = 0xffffffff00000000ULL; > } > + s->brdgopt1 = 0; > + s->brdgopt2 = 0; > s->sts = 0; > } Looks sane, so: Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com> ... but I wonder whether the error_report() in the "default:" case should maybe rather be turned into a qemu_log_mask(LOG_UNIMP, ...) instead? Thomas
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 09:43:59PM +0100, BALATON Zoltan wrote: > I don't know what should be the correct implementation for these so > these are just stored and returned as is without doing anything for > now only to silence warnings when u-boot accesses these registers. > > Signed-off-by: BALATON Zoltan <balaton@eik.bme.hu> I'm a bit dubious about putting in a dummy register implementation. Specifically, I think the case needs to be made that the dummy implementation is preferable to just putting up with the test errors. At the very least there should be a comment in the code indicating that it's just a dummy stub implementation. > --- > hw/ppc/ppc440_pcix.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/hw/ppc/ppc440_pcix.c b/hw/ppc/ppc440_pcix.c > index ab2626a..3f177d3 100644 > --- a/hw/ppc/ppc440_pcix.c > +++ b/hw/ppc/ppc440_pcix.c > @@ -55,6 +55,8 @@ typedef struct PPC440PCIXState { > PCIDevice *dev; > struct PLBOutMap pom[PPC440_PCIX_NR_POMS]; > struct PLBInMap pim[PPC440_PCIX_NR_PIMS]; > + uint32_t brdgopt1; > + uint32_t brdgopt2; > uint32_t sts; > qemu_irq irq[PCI_NUM_PINS]; > AddressSpace bm_as; > @@ -95,6 +97,8 @@ typedef struct PPC440PCIXState { > #define PCIX0_PIM0SAH 0xf8 > #define PCIX0_PIM2SAH 0xfc > > +#define PCIX0_BRDGOPT1 0x40 > +#define PCIX0_BRDGOPT2 0x44 > #define PCIX0_STS 0xe0 > > #define PCI_ALL_SIZE (PPC440_REG_BASE + PPC440_REG_SIZE) > @@ -270,6 +274,12 @@ static void ppc440_pcix_reg_write4(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, > ppc440_pcix_update_pim(s, 2); > break; > > + case PCIX0_BRDGOPT1: > + s->brdgopt1 = val; > + break; > + case PCIX0_BRDGOPT2: > + s->brdgopt2 = val; > + break; > case PCIX0_STS: > s->sts = val; > break; > @@ -365,6 +375,12 @@ static uint64_t ppc440_pcix_reg_read4(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, > val = s->pim[2].la >> 32; > break; > > + case PCIX0_BRDGOPT1: > + val = s->brdgopt1; > + break; > + case PCIX0_BRDGOPT2: > + val = s->brdgopt2; > + break; > case PCIX0_STS: > val = s->sts; > break; > @@ -408,6 +424,8 @@ static void ppc440_pcix_reset(DeviceState *dev) > for (i = 0; i < PPC440_PCIX_NR_PIMS; i++) { > s->pim[i].sa = 0xffffffff00000000ULL; > } > + s->brdgopt1 = 0; > + s->brdgopt2 = 0; > s->sts = 0; > } >
On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, David Gibson wrote: > On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 09:43:59PM +0100, BALATON Zoltan wrote: >> I don't know what should be the correct implementation for these so >> these are just stored and returned as is without doing anything for >> now only to silence warnings when u-boot accesses these registers. >> >> Signed-off-by: BALATON Zoltan <balaton@eik.bme.hu> > > I'm a bit dubious about putting in a dummy register implementation. > Specifically, I think the case needs to be made that the dummy > implementation is preferable to just putting up with the test errors. > > At the very least there should be a comment in the code indicating > that it's just a dummy stub implementation. Let's go with changing the error_report to qemu_log_mask(LOG_UNIMP, ...) as suggested by Thomas instead. I'll send another patch. Regards, BALATON Zoltan
diff --git a/hw/ppc/ppc440_pcix.c b/hw/ppc/ppc440_pcix.c index ab2626a..3f177d3 100644 --- a/hw/ppc/ppc440_pcix.c +++ b/hw/ppc/ppc440_pcix.c @@ -55,6 +55,8 @@ typedef struct PPC440PCIXState { PCIDevice *dev; struct PLBOutMap pom[PPC440_PCIX_NR_POMS]; struct PLBInMap pim[PPC440_PCIX_NR_PIMS]; + uint32_t brdgopt1; + uint32_t brdgopt2; uint32_t sts; qemu_irq irq[PCI_NUM_PINS]; AddressSpace bm_as; @@ -95,6 +97,8 @@ typedef struct PPC440PCIXState { #define PCIX0_PIM0SAH 0xf8 #define PCIX0_PIM2SAH 0xfc +#define PCIX0_BRDGOPT1 0x40 +#define PCIX0_BRDGOPT2 0x44 #define PCIX0_STS 0xe0 #define PCI_ALL_SIZE (PPC440_REG_BASE + PPC440_REG_SIZE) @@ -270,6 +274,12 @@ static void ppc440_pcix_reg_write4(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, ppc440_pcix_update_pim(s, 2); break; + case PCIX0_BRDGOPT1: + s->brdgopt1 = val; + break; + case PCIX0_BRDGOPT2: + s->brdgopt2 = val; + break; case PCIX0_STS: s->sts = val; break; @@ -365,6 +375,12 @@ static uint64_t ppc440_pcix_reg_read4(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, val = s->pim[2].la >> 32; break; + case PCIX0_BRDGOPT1: + val = s->brdgopt1; + break; + case PCIX0_BRDGOPT2: + val = s->brdgopt2; + break; case PCIX0_STS: val = s->sts; break; @@ -408,6 +424,8 @@ static void ppc440_pcix_reset(DeviceState *dev) for (i = 0; i < PPC440_PCIX_NR_PIMS; i++) { s->pim[i].sa = 0xffffffff00000000ULL; } + s->brdgopt1 = 0; + s->brdgopt2 = 0; s->sts = 0; }
I don't know what should be the correct implementation for these so these are just stored and returned as is without doing anything for now only to silence warnings when u-boot accesses these registers. Signed-off-by: BALATON Zoltan <balaton@eik.bme.hu> --- hw/ppc/ppc440_pcix.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)