Mark Cave-Ayland wrote: > On 15/08/11 16:38, Bob Breuer wrote: > >> Depends on the rom. The SS-5 rom always sets it correctly, whereas the >> SS-20 rom only sets it when you do "boot net". Also, this is just the >> top 8 bits of the address. The DMA2 documentation[1] for E_BASE_ADDR >> states that these upper address bits default to 0xff, even though it >> seems to incorrectly define it as bits 7:0 in the register instead of >> 31:24. > > Nice one - looks like I missed this when reading the documentation. At > least the choice of default address now makes sense.
It might also make sense to modify the dma address calculations to use only the top 8 bits from ledma. Not sure if anything will care about that though. >> If you follow Artyom's blog, at [2] it was assumed that the bogus dbri >> device was the culprit (which is also why I went down the path of >> implementing the dbri device), when in reality, the selftest failure >> was preventing "boot net" from running and fixing the ledma register >> settings. > > Okay - I think I see ;) In that case, I'd say this patch should be > applied if Blue hasn't already done it (*sigh* I really miss the git web > interface on qemu.org). http://repo.or.cz/w/qemu.git might be the next best thing, not sure if there is a mirroring delay with it or not. Bob
