From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail.gnudd.com ([77.43.112.34]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1fftF3-0005wu-5e for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 20:40:11 +0000 Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 22:39:24 +0200 From: Alessandro Rubini Message-ID: <20180718203924.GA22208@mail.gnudd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: References: <20180718140321.GA28539@mail.gnudd.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: qemu and barebox To: andrew.smirnov@gmail.com Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org, giuseppe.levi@gmail.com > Not sure if I'd say it would be "complex", but time consuming for > sure. Yes. > but AFAIK, while ARM9 CPU emulation is availible, there's no AT91 SoC > specific IP blocks emulation that it supports. I think the fastest way to work out this setup is building barebox for versatile and using "qemu -M versatilepb". The WR kernel includes drivers for the special ethernet device, but the WR port of barebox has no serious hardware dependencies (it's just uart, flash and i2c eeprom). So IMHO there's no need for AT91 SOC emulation to test different boot procedures. /alessandro _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox