On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 7:05 PM Mark Cave-Ayland < mark.cave-ayl...@ilande.co.uk> wrote:
> On 01/07/2019 19:34, Howard Spoelstra wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 12:30 PM Richard Henderson < > > richard.hender...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > >> On 6/30/19 7:58 PM, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote: > >>> I don't have space for a full set of images on the G4, however I've > >> tried boot tests > >>> on installer CDs for MacOS 9, OS X 10.2, Linux and HelenOS and it looks > >> good here. > >>> > >>> Tested-by: Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayl...@ilande.co.uk> [PPC32] > >> > >> Thanks! > >> > >> Hi > > > > I just compiled the v6 set applied to current master on my G5, Ubuntu 16. > > command line: > > ./qemu-system-ppc -L pc-bios -boot c m 512 -M mac99,via=pmu \ > > -netdev user,id=net1 -device sungem,netdev=net1 \ > > -drive file=10.3.img,format=raw,media=disk \ > > > > With no specific cpu set, Mac OS 9.2 hard disk image and 9.2 iso do not > get > > to the desktop, they just hang while still in the openbios window. They > > need -cpu G4 on the command line to get to the desktop. > > > > OSX 10.3 installed image boots to desktop. > > OSX 10.3 iso boots to installer > > OSX 10.4 installed image boots to desktop. > > OSX 10.4 iso boot to installer > > OSX 10.5 installed image boots to desktop. > > OSX 10.5 iso boots to installer > > > > So there seems to be a difference between hosts: If ran on a G4 host > there > > is no need to add -cpu G4 to run Mac OS 9.x, while there is when ran on a > > G5 host. > > Are there any outstanding issues with this patchset now, or is it ready to > be merged? > I'm really looking forward to seeing the improved performance when testing > QEMU on my > Mac Mini :) > > Howard pointed to some illogical quirks of command line: > If ran on a G4 host there is no need to add -cpu G4 to run Mac OS 9.x, > while there is when ran on a G5 host. I am not sure if Howard says that this is a consequence of this series though. Overall, I think this is a very good series - however, I had a number of minor objections to multiple patches, that don't affect (or affect in a minimal way) provided functionality - those objections are not addressed, nor properly discussed - but I do think they should be addressed in order to get the series in a better shape before upstreaming. Thanks, Aleksandar > ATB, > > Mark. > >
