[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] hw/arm: Add Arm Enterprise machine type

From: Andrew Jones
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 2/2] hw/arm: Add Arm Enterprise machine type
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 13:44:04 +0200
User-agent: NeoMutt/20180622

On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 06:46:59PM +0800, Hongbo Zhang wrote:
> On 25 July 2018 at 17:54, Andrew Jones <address@hidden> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 01:30:52PM +0800, Hongbo Zhang wrote:
> >> For the Aarch64, there is one machine 'virt', it is primarily meant to
> >> run on KVM and execute virtualization workloads, but we need an
> >> environment as faithful as possible to physical hardware, for supporting
> >> firmware and OS development for pysical Aarch64 machines.
> >>
> >> This patch introduces new machine type 'Enterprise' with main features:
> >>  - Based on 'virt' machine type.
> >>  - Re-designed memory map.
> >>  - EL2 and EL3 are enabled by default.
> >>  - GIC version 3 by default.
> >>  - AHCI controller attached to system bus, and then CDROM and hard disc
> >>    can be added to it.
> >>  - EHCI controller attached to system bus, with USB mouse and key board
> >>    installed by default.
> >>  - E1000E ethernet card on PCIE bus.
> >>  - VGA display adaptor on PCIE bus.
> >>  - Default CPU type cortex-a57, 4 cores, and 1G bytes memory.
> >>  - No virtio functions enabled, since this is to emulate real hardware.
> >
> > In the last review it was pointed out that using virtio-pci should still
> > be "real" enough, so there's not much reason to avoid it. Well, unless
> > there's some concern as to what drivers are available in the firmware and
> > guest kernel. But that concern usually only applies to legacy firmwares
> > and kernels, and therefore shouldn't apply to AArch64.
> >
> For Armv7, there is one typical platform 'vexpress', but for Armv8, no

Wasn't the vexpress model designed for a specific machine? Namely for
Arm's simulator? Is the vexpress model really something typical among
all the Armv7 platforms?

> such typical one, the 'virt' is typically for running workloads, one
> example is using it under OpenStack.
> So a 'typical' one for Armv8 is needed for firmware and OS
> development, similar like 'vexpress' for Armv7.

What is a "typical" Armv8 machine? What will a typical Armv8 machine be in
two years?

Note, I'm not actually opposed to the current definition (because I don't
really have one myself). I'm just opposed to hard coding one.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]