[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] Testing sysbus devices

From: Markus Armbruster
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Testing sysbus devices
Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2019 07:09:33 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux)

Stephen Checkoway <address@hidden> writes:

> On Feb 18, 2019, at 13:08, Markus Armbruster <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Stephen Checkoway <address@hidden> writes:
>>> On Feb 18, 2019, at 08:43, Thomas Huth <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> On 18/02/2019 07.07, Stephen Checkoway wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> I've been working on some improvements to the pflash_cfi02 block device 
>>>>> (interleaved flash devices similar to pflash_cfi01, multi-sector erase, 
>>>>> nonuniform sector sizes, and some bug fixes and I'm planning on 
>>>>> implementing sector erase suspend/resume commands in the near future).
>> Any chance you could do multiple region support, too?
> Can you point me at the data sheet for a flash chip with multiple region 
> support? For my purposes, I only need the features I mentioned, but if it's a 
> simple change, I'll consider it.

I'm not familiar with CFI pflash, but I can operate a search engine.
Have a look at page 27 and 56 of


and tell us whether it's helpful.

>>>> QTestState *qts;
>>>> qts = qtest_initf(" qemu-system-arm -M musicpal,accel=qtest "
>>>>               "-drive if=pflash,file=%s,format=raw", filename);
>>> If I do that, will it be possible for the test to override the properties 
>>> set by pflash_cfi02_register? It looks like I should be able to use -global 
>>> to set properties that aren't set explicitly.
>> Yes.
>> Won't work for properties set by pflash_cfi02_register(), though.  To
>> test the full range of values there, you'd have to make them
>> configurable somehow.  We currently don't have a good way to do that.
>> Please see
>>    Subject: Re: Configuring pflash devices for OVMF firmware
>>    Message-ID: <address@hidden>
>>    https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2019-02/msg01734.html
> I see. That's too bad.

I think a test would be quite welcome even if it only tests what's
testable now with reasonable effort.

reply via email to

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