Re: [Qemu-riscv] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-3.2 v7 5/6] hw/riscv/sifive_u: Connect the Xilinx PCIe

[Alistair Francis]

On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 1:26 PM Palmer Dabbelt <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 21 Nov 2018 10:32:45 PST (-0800), address@hidden wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2018 at 10:05 AM Logan Gunthorpe <address@hidden> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2018-11-21 10:02 a.m., Alistair Francis wrote:
> >> > Connect the Xilinx PCIe device based on the information in the device
> >> > tree stored in the ROM of the HiFish Unleashed board.
> >>
> >> I only briefly tested this patch but could not get any PCI devices to
> >> come up with the sifive_u machine. Depending on the kernel I tried, it
> >> either failed to initialize a Xilinx PCIe (likely due to a mismatch with
> >> the DT) or it appears to successfully initialize a Microsemi device but
> >> did not enumerate any devices underneath.
> >
> > That seems like either a kernel or bbl issue.
> >
> > You need to make sure that bbl doesn't edit the device tree (to add
> > the Microsemi device or remove the Xilinx one) and ensure your kernel
> > supports the Xilinx one.
> >
> >>
> >> In any case, it would be nice if the Microsemi/Xilinx confusion was at
> >> least explained in the commit message.
> >
> > What should we say? The QEMU machine accurately models the real
> > hardware which reports a Xilinx PCIe. The confusion generally appears
> > above QEMU where people are used to using the MicroSemi one.
>
> I think the real issue here is that "sifive_u" doesn't actually fully describe
> the device we're trying to emulate.  Is it a:
>
> * Generic SiFive U core?  In that case we just have a 64-bit core and
>   essentially no devices.  This is kind of useless.
> * A HiFive Unleashed?  In that case there's no PCIe, as it requires an
>   expansion board.
> * A HiFive Unleashed + VC707?  Here we have Xilinx PCIe.
> * A HiFive Unleashed + Microsemi Expansion?  Here have Microsemi PCIe.

This isn't even always consistent. For example the sifive_u machine
exists for 32-bit cores, but the PCIe address reported by the hardware
only works for 64-bit machines.

So we need a trade off between accurately modelling the hardware or
having 32-bit support.

>
> There's a tradeoff between accurately emulating the hardware and blowing up 
> the
> amount of targets we support in QEMU.  We went through this discussion before
> and ended up where we are now, but maybe it's best to go have the discussion
> again?

Up to you, it is your board :)

I think it makes more sense to remove these generic boards (that is
what the virt board is for) and model real hardware boards.

Alistair