On 04/30/2013 06:06 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: > On 04/30/2013 06:00 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote: >> On 04/30/2013 05:24 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >>> On 04/30/2013 05:07 PM, Fabien Chouteau wrote: >>>> The value was changed by the "PPC: fix hreset_vector..." patch. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Fabien Chouteau<chout...@adacore.com> >>>> --- >>>> hw/ppc/prep.c | 3 +++ >>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/hw/ppc/prep.c b/hw/ppc/prep.c >>>> index cceab3e..2d0c4fe 100644 >>>> --- a/hw/ppc/prep.c >>>> +++ b/hw/ppc/prep.c >>>> @@ -427,6 +427,9 @@ static void ppc_prep_reset(void *opaque) >>>> PowerPCCPU *cpu = opaque; >>>> >>>> cpu_reset(CPU(cpu)); >>>> + >>>> + /* Reset address */ >>>> + cpu->env.nip = 0xfffffffc; >>> Why does PREP reset at this vector? Is it architected to that? Does 601 >>> reset to that offset? >>> >> I don't know why PReP reset here. As I said in the hreset_vector patch, >> even if the core manual says that hreset is at 0xfff00100, the value is >> in fact board specific. OpenHackWare expects 0xfffffffc as reset >> address. > > Do you have 601e or 601 specs handy? Maybe they have a different reset vector. >
None of the specs I have talk about 0xfffffffc... > Maybe OHW is also just wrong ;). > Maybe, but I have no way to prove it. -- Fabien Chouteau
