On Fri, 17 Jan 2020, Igor Mammedov wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 16:38:02 +0100
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 1/17/20 11:46 AM, Igor Mammedov wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 22:33:46 +0100 (CET)
BALATON Zoltan wrote:
[...]
v2 basically works the same as original code, except of that
instead of
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 16:38:02 +0100
Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 1/17/20 11:46 AM, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 22:33:46 +0100 (CET)
> > BALATON Zoltan wrote:
> >
> [...]
> > v2 basically works the same as original code, except of that
> > instead of fixing up ram_size, i
On 1/17/20 11:46 AM, Igor Mammedov wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 22:33:46 +0100 (CET)
BALATON Zoltan wrote:
[...]
v2 basically works the same as original code, except of that
instead of fixing up ram_size, it ask user to fix CLI to
the same value.
but I've not yet given up to keep current func
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 22:33:46 +0100 (CET)
BALATON Zoltan wrote:
> Subject line is still wrong, it's sam460ex not sam460x. Also you change
> ppc:whatever to ppc/whatever here but left : as path separator in all
> other patches. This is not consistent with other commits where the tag in
> the tit
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020 at 04:07:21PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> If user provided non-sense RAM size, board will complain and
> continue running with max RAM size supported or sometimes
> crash like this:
> %QEMU -M bamboo -m 1
> exec.c:1926: find_ram_offset: Assertion `size != 0' failed.
>
Subject line is still wrong, it's sam460ex not sam460x. Also you change
ppc:whatever to ppc/whatever here but left : as path separator in all
other patches. This is not consistent with other commits where the tag in
the title is usually a path of the changed part or in this case could be
ppc
If user provided non-sense RAM size, board will complain and
continue running with max RAM size supported or sometimes
crash like this:
%QEMU -M bamboo -m 1
exec.c:1926: find_ram_offset: Assertion `size != 0' failed.
Aborted (core dumped)
Also RAM is going to be allocated by generic code,
