On Sun, 22 Jan 2023, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
On 11/01/2023 00:36, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2023, Mark Cave-Ayland wrote:
On 04/01/2023 21:59, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
The mac99 machine emulates different machines depending on machine
properties or even if it is run as qemu-system-ppc64 or
qemu-system-ppc. This is very confusing for users and many hours were
lost trying to explain it or finding out why commands users came up
with are not working as expected. (E.g. Windows users might think
qemu-system-ppc64 is just the 64 bit version of qemu-system-ppc and
then fail to boot a 32 bit OS with -M mac99 trying to follow an
example that had qemu-system-ppc.) To avoid such confusion, add
explicit machine types for the different configs which will work the
same with both qemu-system-ppc and qemu-system-ppc64 and also make the
command line clearer for new users.
Signed-off-by: BALATON Zoltan <bala...@eik.bme.hu>
Some thoughts on this: the first is that not everyone agrees that for
qemu-system-X that X represents the target. There were previous discussion
where some KVM people assumed X represented the host, i.e. ppc64 was the
binary that ran all PPC guests but with hardware acceleration for ppc64
guests on ppc64 hosts. This was a while ago, so it may be worth starting a
thread on qemu-devel to see what the current consensus is.
I don't see how this is relevant to this series, Also likely not the case
any more as qemu-system-ppc and qemu-system-ppc64 share most of the code
since a while with ppc64 including the config of ppc and adding more
machines.
Well the patch defines the powermac 7.3 machine just for TARGET_PPC64, no? So
you're making the assumption qemu-system-ppc64 represents a 64-bit target
rather than a 64-bit host.
I'm not making that assumption, it's already there:
$ qemu-system-ppc -machine help
Supported machines are:
40p IBM RS/6000 7020 (40p)
bamboo bamboo
g3beige Heathrow based PowerMAC (default)
mac99 Mac99 based PowerMAC
mpc8544ds mpc8544ds
none empty machine
pegasos2 Genesi/bPlan Pegasos II
ppce500 generic paravirt e500 platform
ref405ep ref405ep
sam460ex aCube Sam460ex
virtex-ml507 Xilinx Virtex ML507 reference design
$ qemu-system-ppc64 -machine help
Supported machines are:
40p IBM RS/6000 7020 (40p)
bamboo bamboo
g3beige Heathrow based PowerMAC
mac99 Mac99 based PowerMAC
mpc8544ds mpc8544ds
none empty machine
pegasos2 Genesi/bPlan Pegasos II
powernv10 IBM PowerNV (Non-Virtualized) POWER10
powernv8 IBM PowerNV (Non-Virtualized) POWER8
powernv IBM PowerNV (Non-Virtualized) POWER9 (alias of powernv9)
powernv9 IBM PowerNV (Non-Virtualized) POWER9
ppce500 generic paravirt e500 platform
pseries-2.1 pSeries Logical Partition (PAPR compliant)
[lots of different pseries versions omitted here]
pseries pSeries Logical Partition (PAPR compliant) (alias of
pseries-8.0)
pseries-8.0 pSeries Logical Partition (PAPR compliant) (default)
ref405ep ref405ep
sam460ex aCube Sam460ex
virtex-ml507 Xilinx Virtex ML507 reference design
It makes no sense to define it for qemu-system-ppc as that version does
not have G5 and 64 bit CPUs compiled in. Cf. qemu-system-ppc -cpu help and
qemu-system-ppc64 -cpu help or target/ppc/cpu-models.c so I don't know
what you're talking about.
Secondly it's not clear to me why you've chosen names like "powermac_3_1"
instead of "g4agp"? Does powermac_3_1 uniquely identify the G4 AGP
Sawtooth model? For QEMU it is always best to emulate real machines, and
whilst I understand you want to separate out the two versions of the mac99
machine, having "powermac_X_Y" seems less clear to me.
These machine model identifiers are used by Apple to uniquely identify (all
of) their machines since new-world Macs (even modern iPads and Macs have
them) so for Mac people this should be clearer than the informal names that
could get a bit long and confusing as there may be slight differences
within a family. In any case, qemu-system-ppc -M mac99 is not corresponding
to any real Mac so I'd like the options which do emulate real Macs to be
called in a name that show which Mac is that. For the PPC Macs there's some
info here for example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Mac_G4
And everymac.com also has info on all Macs. There were actually more than
one G4 PowerMac with AGP but the other one was informally called gigabit
ethernet. So the model ID is a shorter and better way to clearly identify
which hardware is it (and it's also referenced in the device-tree of these
Macs).
Are you planning to work on different types of G4 Mac where this could be
confusing? Even to me "PowerMac 3.1" doesn't really tell me what model of Mac
is being emulated, whereas "g4agp" (much in the same way as g3beige) is much
more friendlier to people interested in using QEMU for Mac emulation.
This is similar problem as some people like to call Mac OS X versions by
number and some by big cats names. Personally I prefer version numbers
because it's easy to tell which is newer or older that way without
remembering a nomenclature or having to look it up every time. It would be
good if others interested in this also shared their preference because if
it's only us two with different views then it's hard to make a decision. I
still think machine ID is better also because then these machines would be
grouped in the -machine help output like the others but as long as we
don't have other machines that start with a g or other Macs that have some
other name it might work so I could change the naming if that's all needed
for this to get in.
Finally can you post links to the device trees that you are using for each
of the new machine types so that we have a clear reference point for
future changes to the QEMU Mac machines? Even better include the links in
the comments for each machine so that the information is easily visible
for developers.
I still have those I've posted over the past 8 years when I made changes to
OpenBIOS to make the device-tree closer to real machine. I've downloaded it
back then, don't know where to find it now but searching for e.g.
"PowerMac3,1" "device-tree" should get some results.
Nothing shows up for me, I'm afraid (remember that Google searches are unique
to each user). If you want argue for changing the QEMU machines, then we
should agree on the reference device model for future changes.
Sigh, maybe search your list archives instead of Googls. Also it's
"PowerMac3,1" where I've converted the comma to underscre for qemu command
line parsing so became powermac3_1 not powermac_3_1. Try searching with
quotes to reduce the number of false results.
- mac99 (via=cuda) does not exist so no real device tree for this needed
- powermac3_1 (currently mac99,via=pmu) I've sent links years ago e.g.:
https://mail.coreboot.org/pipermail/openbios/2016-February/009145.html
but you still keep asking
- powermac7_3 (ppc64 mac99) The expected hardware is listed in a comment
in mac_newworld.c also it adds a 970fx CPU and according to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Mac_G5 PowerMac7,3 was the first
version with 970fx so I think that was the target for whoever started it
back then. These G5 Macs are probably still around so you should be able
to ask someone to get a device tree dump, I've only seen Linux hardware
listings:
https://gist.github.com/tomari/3689297
https://forum.ubuntu-fr.org/viewtopic.php?id=2026003 (last post)
-powerbook3_2 (mac99,via=pmi-adb) this is rare as Macs with PMU usually
have USB and not ADB; only the first PowerBooks had an ADB trackpad (but
no outside ports AFAIK). All other Macs with ADB had CUDA so I'm not even
sure we need this option but if we want it then the first PowerBooks are
candidates, I've picked the lowest number for 1st gen Titanium PowerBook
from here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerBook_G4
and e.g. these links confirm it had ADB:
https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/12-powerbook-g4-867mhz-xorg-doesnt-work.37815/
http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,4781.msg41380.html?PHPSESSID=75b23dcb4c042b51c6dddd311cff2341#msg41380
It would be tough to come up with a name for the powerbook3_2 though as
these were called Early 2001 Titanium PowerBook G4 or code name Mercury
but even Mac fanatics probably couldn't tell that was a powerbook if you
call it g4mercury so I'm open to votes on naming but hard to be convinced
there's anything simpler and more straightforward than using machine id
which is usually also listed everywhere for these.
Regards,
BALATON Zoltan
