Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] target-ppc: Remove vestigial PowerPC 620 support (v2)

[Alexander Graf]

On 12.02.2013, at 11:23, Andreas Färber wrote:

> Am 12.02.2013 03:16, schrieb David Gibson:
>> The PowerPC 620 was the very first 64-bit PowerPC implementation, but
>> hardly anyone ever actually used the chips.  qemu notionally supports the
>> 620, but since we don't actually have code to implement the segment table,
>> the support is broken (quite likely in other ways too).
>> 
>> This partch, therefore, removes all remaining pieces of 620 support, to
>> stop it cluttering up the platforms we actually care about.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: David Gibson <address@hidden>
>> ---
>> v2: Don't remove the POWERPC_DEF()s from the table, just move them under
>> #ifdef(TODO) to document the CPU's existence and aliases.
> [...]
>> diff --git a/target-ppc/translate_init.c b/target-ppc/translate_init.c
>> index 6cebaa1..1d2e842 100644
>> --- a/target-ppc/translate_init.c
>> +++ b/target-ppc/translate_init.c
> [...]
>> @@ -9244,11 +9000,11 @@ static const ppc_def_t ppc_defs[] = {
>>     POWERPC_DEF("7457A_v1.2",    CPU_POWERPC_74x7A_v12,              7455),
>>     /* 64 bits PowerPC                                                       
>> */
>> #if defined (TARGET_PPC64)
>> +#if defined (TODO)
> 
> checkpatch.pl will surely complain about the space, and elsewhere the
> #ifs are repeated per model/family. I.e., I would've expected one new
> pair of #if defined(TODO) and #endif around the two 620 definitions. Or
> does the already-TODO 630 model depend on the 620 code despite type 630?
> 
>>     /* PowerPC 620                                                           
>> */
>>     POWERPC_DEF("620",           CPU_POWERPC_620,                    620),
>>     /* Code name for PowerPC 620                                             
>> */
>>     POWERPC_DEF("Trident",       CPU_POWERPC_620,                    620),
>> -#if defined (TODO)
>>     /* PowerPC 630 (POWER3)                                                  
>> */
>>     POWERPC_DEF("630",           CPU_POWERPC_630,                    630),
>>     POWERPC_DEF("POWER3",        CPU_POWERPC_630,                    630),
> [snip]
> 
> I've CC'ed you on the patchset that Alex and me had been preparing.
> Let's leave it to Alex how to proceed with the conflicting patches.

I would like to get the QOM'ification through first, then declare 620 as 
unsupported.

David, I think the best way to proceed here would be to not touch anything in 
translate_init.c in your MMU cleanup patch set :). Or wouldn't that work?


Alex