This is obviously wrong, we have to put a \0 to separate the two options. But thee question remains, should we mark that as arm,armv8-timer compatible?
Thanks, Claudio On 15 September 2014 10:14, <hw.clau...@gmail.com> wrote: > From: Claudio Fontana <claudio.font...@huawei.com> > > Signed-off-by: Claudio Fontana <claudio.font...@huawei.com> > --- > hw/arm/virt.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > Is the timer armv8-compatible? I think it is, at least the virtual > timer seems to work as expected. > > When looking up the timer information in the guest btw, > where the guest is running AArch64, does it make sense to look > for an armv8-timer compatible string? > Or is the "/timer" path standard enough that I should look for > the node using that fixed path instead? > > Thanks, > > Claudio > > diff --git a/hw/arm/virt.c b/hw/arm/virt.c > index d6fffc7..8dbaf9d 100644 > --- a/hw/arm/virt.c > +++ b/hw/arm/virt.c > @@ -245,7 +245,7 @@ static void fdt_add_timer_nodes(const VirtBoardInfo *vbi) > > qemu_fdt_add_subnode(vbi->fdt, "/timer"); > qemu_fdt_setprop_string(vbi->fdt, "/timer", > - "compatible", "arm,armv7-timer"); > + "compatible", "arm,armv7-timer,armv8-timer"); > qemu_fdt_setprop_cells(vbi->fdt, "/timer", "interrupts", > GIC_FDT_IRQ_TYPE_PPI, 13, irqflags, > GIC_FDT_IRQ_TYPE_PPI, 14, irqflags, > -- > 1.8.5.3 >
