[coreboot] [PATCH] Seabios on Virtutech Simics x86-440bx model

[Magnus Christensson]

On 11/04/2009 03:40 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 10:30:12PM -0500, Kevin O'Connor wrote:
>    
>> On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 04:31:32PM +0100, Magnus Christensson wrote:
>>      
>>> I'm attaching patches for seabios to make it work on the Virtutech
>>> Simics x86-440bx model. Please let me know if there is some other list
>>> that is preferred for seabios patches.
>>>
>>> Patches 1-6 and 9 are not really related to the Virtutech model at all,
>>> so those would be prime candidates to be included in the mainline
>>> version.
>>>        
>>      
> l>  Thanks Magnus.
>    
>> Gleb I'm not sure if you're on the coreboot mailing list - can you
>> take a look at these patches as well?  A URL is at:
>>
>> http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.bios/55487
>>
>>      
> Can I get them in a mbox format somewhere? Want to tested them to be
> sure. From review:
> 1:
>   OK
>
> 2:
>   What is the reason for this? x86info --mptable on my 4 core AMD shows
> MP Table:
> #       APIC ID Version State           Family  Model   Step    Flags
> #        0       0x10    BSP, usable     16      4       1     0x178bfbff
> #        1       0x10    AP, usable      16      4       1     0x178bfbff
> #        2       0x10    AP, usable      16      4       1     0x178bfbff
> #        3       0x10    AP, usable      16      4       1     0x178bfbff
>    
I can think of two reasons for only listing one CPU per package. The 
first would be performance, in that the OS needs to be aware of 
multi-threading in order not to slow down high priority tasks with stuff 
that is usually free when running on multiple processors (like 
spinlocks). The second reason would be that logical CPUs in the same 
package share some MSRs, and an OS that isn't aware of that may cease to 
work in such an environment.

Related link:

http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/hyper-threading-implications-and-setup-on-microsoft-operating-systems/

> 3:
>   And why is this? My mptable spec (from 1997) says that apic id is 8 bit
>   and x86info --mptable on my Intel with 16 logical cpus shows:
> MP Table:
> #       APIC ID Version State           Family  Model   Step    Flags
> #        0       0x15    BSP, usable     6       10      5       0x0381
> #       16       0x15    AP, usable      6       10      5       0x0381
> Interesting that on Intel only one entry per physical package.
>    
I don't really remember the reason for that limit. I simply added stuff 
from our BIOS to SeaBIOS until they generated identical MPS tables. Feel 
free to ignore this patch.
> 4:
>   I am not sure why we want to make it faster (waiting anyway) but OK.
>    
Virtutech Simics is often run with scripted input, and time is then 
compressed whenever possible to boost overall performance.

> 5:
>   OK. Wanted to add this by myself for a long time. We configure LINT0 inside KVM
>   now, but this is BIOS job.
>
> 6:
>   OK.
>
> 7:
>   Don't like VIRTUTECH_IRQ0_OVERRIDE checking inside qemu_cfg_irq0_override().
>   What about creating irq0_override() in generic code that will call
>   qemu_cfg_irq0_override() if needed. Setting VIRTUTECH_IRQ0_OVERRIDE to
>   1 by default is not a welcomed too :)
>    
I'll add a QEMU compatible paravirt device for Simics, and then we can 
live without this patch.
> 8:
>   Do not set VIRTUTECH_PC_SHADOW to 1 by default please. Otherwise the
>   code is not used by qemu so OK.
>
> 9:
>   OK
>
> 10:
>   USE_CMOS_BIOS_SMP_COUNT default to 1
>    
I'm attaching the (modified) patches.

M.