qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: "Bad ram offset"?


From: Artyom Tarasenko
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: "Bad ram offset"?
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 22:36:01 +0200

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Blue Swirl <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:42 PM, Andreas Färber <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Am 28.09.2010 um 22:24 schrieb Blue Swirl:
>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 8:02 PM, Andreas Färber <address@hidden>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Am 28.09.2010 um 21:31 schrieb Artyom Tarasenko:
>>>>
>>>>> 2010/9/28 Blue Swirl <address@hidden>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 9:19 PM, Artyom Tarasenko
>>>>>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In today's git master:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> $ ./qemu-system-sparc64 -M sun4u -m 2048
>>>>>>> Bad ram offset ffffffff80000000
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Smells like unwanted sign extension somewhere.
>>>>>
>>>>> fwiw, tested -m 2048 with i386 and x86-64 and they both are fine with
>>>>> it. So it must be something platform-specific.
>>>>
>>>> Same behavior on ppc host fwiw.
>>>
>>> The attached patch should fix this.
>>> <0001-sysbus-fix-address-truncation.patch>
>>
>>
>> Tested-by: Andreas Färber <address@hidden>
>>
>> Above test cases work fine on ppc64 now. Anything else to cross-check?
>
> 32 bit host, like ppc32 or x86?

Grr. I have only a cygwin x86 host, and it looks like testing on it is
a bad idea:

$ sparc-softmmu/qemu-system-sparc -M SS-10 -m 2112
qemu: at most 2047 MB RAM can be simulated

$ sparc64-softmmu/qemu-system-sparc64.exe  -m 2112
qemu: at most 2047 MB RAM can be simulated

$  uname -s -r -v -m -p -o
CYGWIN_NT-5.1 1.7.5(0.225/5/3) 2010-04-12 19:07 i686 unknown Cygwin

-- 
Regards,
Artyom Tarasenko

solaris/sparc under qemu blog: http://tyom.blogspot.com/



reply via email to

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