[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-arm] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] hw/arm/boot: allow using a command l
Re: [Qemu-arm] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] hw/arm/boot: allow using a command line specified dtb without a kernel
Fri, 7 Oct 2016 15:33:31 +0100
On 7 October 2016 at 15:09, Stefan Hajnoczi <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 06:58:37PM -0700, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> I think we have two choices:
>> (1) just go ahead and remove the error-check, on the basis that:
>> * for some boards -dtb is useful even without -kernel
>> * -dtb might be ignored even with -kernel if the specified
>> kernel isn't a DTB-aware kernel, but we ignore that
>> * -dtb is ignored even with -kernel for target archs/boards
>> which don't support or use DTB, and we don't warn about that
>> * we don't warn about -kernel being useless for target boards
>> that don't pay any attention to it
>> (2) add some kind of field to MachineClass indicating whether
>> the machine can handle dtb files with/without a kernel
>> (and perhaps also whether the machine supports -kernel at all),
>> use that to gate the warning messages, and update all the
>> machines to correctly indicate what they can or can't handle.
>> This would let us give warning messages when the user asks
>> for something we're going to ignore (including letting us
>> fix up some of the cases we don't currently deal with as
>> enumerated above), but it would be a fair chunk of effort
>> for a fairly small user-friendliness gain
>> Thinking about it more, I'm inclining towards the simpler
>> option (1). Paolo, do you have an opinion here ?
> The error check doesn't seem worth the effort. It's a convenience
> message to notify users that their configuration is broken but we can't
> detect all the cases where it's broken. It doesn't seem like a good
> business to be in :).
I agree, so let's apply this patch as-is; added to target-arm.next.