Xilinx ZCU102 fixes for 2.11
cover Xilinx ZCU102 fixes for 2.11
These are two small fixes for 2.11.
Alistair Francis (2):
xlnx-zynqmp: Properly support the smp command line option
xlnx-zcu102: Add an info message deprecating the EP108
hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c | 6 +++++- hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++---------- 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
Signature · 1 line
2.11.0
PATCH 2/2 xlnx-zcu102: Add an info message deprecating the EP108
The EP108 was an early access development board that is no longer used. Add an info message to convert any users to the ZCU102 instead. On QEMU they are both identical.
---
hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c +3 -0
@@ -164,6 +164,9 @@ static void xlnx_ep108_init(MachineState *machine) {XlnxZCU102 *s =EP108_MACHINE (machine); +info_report ("The Xilinx EP108 machine is deprecated, please use the " +"ZCU102 machine instead. It has the same features supported." ); +xlnx_zynqmp_init (s, machine); }
Signature · 1 line
2.11.0
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): 949865c4381080ce685097390f69115d7f6ef111.1510080103.git.alistair.francis@xilinx.com
Re: [Qemu-arm] [PATCH v1 1/2] xlnx-zynqmp: Properly support the smp command line option
Quoted 82 lines · Alistair Francis
Allow the -smp command line option to control the number of CPUs we create.
Signed-off-by Alistair Francis <[email protected]>---
hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c | 3 ++- hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++---------- 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c +2
-1@@ -235,7 +235,8 @@ static void xlnx_zcu102_machine_class_init(ObjectClass *oc, void *data) {MachineClass *mc =MACHINE_CLASS (oc); - mc->desc ="Xilinx ZynqMP ZCU102 board" ; + mc->desc ="Xilinx ZynqMP ZCU102 board with 4xA53s and 2xR5s based on " \ +"the value of smp" ; mc->init = xlnx_zcu102_init; mc->block_default_type =IF_IDE ; mc->units_per_default_bus =1 ;hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c +8
-5@@ -98,8 +98,9 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_create_rpu(XlnxZynqMPState *s, const char *boot_cpu, {Error *err =NULL ;int i; +int num_rpus =MIN (smp_cpus -XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ,XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_RPU_CPUS ); -for (i =0 ; i <XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_RPU_CPUS ; i++) { +for (i =0 ; i < num_rpus; i++) {char *name; object_initialize(&s->rpu_cpu[i], sizeof(s->rpu_cpu[i]),@@ -132,8 +133,9 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_init(Object *obj) {XlnxZynqMPState *s =XLNX_ZYNQMP (obj);int i; +int num_apus =MIN (smp_cpus,XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ); -for (i =0 ; i <XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ; i++) { +for (i =0 ; i < num_apus; i++) {object_initialize (&s->apu_cpu[i],sizeof (s->apu_cpu[i]),"cortex-a53-" TYPE_ARM_CPU ); object_property_add_child(obj, "apu-cpu[*]", OBJECT(&s->apu_cpu[i]),@@ -182,6 +184,7 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp)MemoryRegion *system_memory =get_system_memory ();uint8_t i;uint64_t ram_size; +int num_apus =MIN (smp_cpus,XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS );const char *boot_cpu = s->boot_cpu ? s->boot_cpu :"apu-cpu[0]" ;ram_addr_t ddr_low_size, ddr_high_size;qemu_irq gic_spi[GIC_NUM_SPI_INTR ];@@ -233,10 +236,10 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp)qdev_prop_set_uint32 (DEVICE (&s->gic),"num-irq" ,GIC_NUM_SPI_INTR +32 );qdev_prop_set_uint32 (DEVICE (&s->gic),"revision" ,2 ); -qdev_prop_set_uint32 (DEVICE (&s->gic),"num-cpu" ,XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ); +qdev_prop_set_uint32 (DEVICE (&s->gic),"num-cpu" , num_apus);/* Realize APUs before realizing the GIC. KVM requires this. */ -for (i =0 ; i <XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ; i++) { +for (i =0 ; i < num_apus; i++) {char *name; object_property_set_int(OBJECT(&s->apu_cpu[i]), QEMU_PSCI_CONDUIT_SMC,@@ -292,7 +295,7 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) } } -for (i =0 ; i <XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ; i++) { +for (i =0 ; i < num_apus; i++) {qemu_irq irq; sysbus_connect_irq(SYS_BUS_DEVICE(&s->gic), i,@@ -307,11 +310,14 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) }
hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) · line 315
Quoted 10 lines
hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c +3
-5if (s->has_rpu) { -xlnx_zynqmp_create_rpu (s, boot_cpu, &err); -if (err) { -error_propagate (errp, err); -return ; - } +info_report ("The 'has_rpu' property is no longer required, to use the " +"RPUs just use -smp 6." ); + }
Is "-global driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on" without an explicit -smp option supposed to be a supported configuration?
0) On current master, we have this:
$ ./aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 -machine xlnx-zcu102 -global driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on ** ERROR:/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/tcg/tcg.c:538:tcg_register_thread: assertion failed: (n < max_cpus) Aborted (core dumped)
1) With your patch we have this:
$ ./aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 -machine xlnx-zcu102 -global driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on -monitor stdio QEMU 2.10.50 monitor - type 'help' for more information (qemu) qemu-system-aarch64: info: The 'has_rpu' property is no longer required, to use the RPUs just use -smp 6. (qemu) info cpus * CPU #0: thread_id=1662 (qemu)
2) With your patch plus Emilio's original min_cpus/default_cpus proposal[1], we have this:
$ ./aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 -machine xlnx-zcu102 -global driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on -monitor stdio
QEMU 2.10.50 monitor - type 'help' for more information
(qemu) qemu-system-aarch64: info: The 'has_rpu' property is no longer required, to use the RPUs just use -smp 6.
(qemu) info cpus
* CPU #0: thread_id=7112
CPU #1: (halted) thread_id=7113
CPU #2: (halted) thread_id=7114
CPU #3: (halted) thread_id=7115
(qemu)3) With Emilio's max_additional_cpus proposal[2], we have this:
$ ./aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 -machine xlnx-zcu102 -global driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on -monitor stdio
QEMU 2.10.50 monitor - type 'help' for more information
(qemu) info cpus
* CPU #0: thread_id=4045
CPU #1: (halted) thread_id=4046
CPU #2: (halted) thread_id=4047
CPU #3: (halted) thread_id=4048
CPU #4: (halted) thread_id=4049
CPU #5: (halted) thread_id=4050
(qemu) Which option is preferred? I like option #2 because it's simpler, but I would like to confirm this is really the intended behavior.
[1] https://mid.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
[2] https://mid.mail-archive.com/20171106215454.GB2152@flamenco
Quoted 11 lines
hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c +5
-0+ +xlnx_zynqmp_create_rpu (s, boot_cpu, &err); +if (err) { +error_propagate (errp, err); +return ; }if (!s->boot_cpu_ptr) {Signature · 1 line
2.11.0
Signature · 1 line
Eduardo
Re: [Qemu-arm] [PATCH v1 1/2] xlnx-zynqmp: Properly support the smp command line option
Quoted 141 lines · Eduardo Habkost
Quoted 82 lines · Alistair Francis
Allow the -smp command line option to control the number of CPUs we create.
Signed-off-by Alistair Francis <[email protected]>---
hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c | 3 ++- hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++---------- 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c +2
-1@@ -235,7 +235,8 @@ static void xlnx_zcu102_machine_class_init(ObjectClass *oc, void *data) {MachineClass *mc =MACHINE_CLASS (oc); - mc->desc ="Xilinx ZynqMP ZCU102 board" ; + mc->desc ="Xilinx ZynqMP ZCU102 board with 4xA53s and 2xR5s based on " \ +"the value of smp" ; mc->init = xlnx_zcu102_init; mc->block_default_type =IF_IDE ; mc->units_per_default_bus =1 ;hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c +8
-5@@ -98,8 +98,9 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_create_rpu(XlnxZynqMPState *s, const char *boot_cpu, {Error *err =NULL ;int i; +int num_rpus =MIN (smp_cpus -XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ,XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_RPU_CPUS ); -for (i =0 ; i <XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_RPU_CPUS ; i++) { +for (i =0 ; i < num_rpus; i++) {char *name; object_initialize(&s->rpu_cpu[i], sizeof(s->rpu_cpu[i]),@@ -132,8 +133,9 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_init(Object *obj) {XlnxZynqMPState *s =XLNX_ZYNQMP (obj);int i; +int num_apus =MIN (smp_cpus,XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ); -for (i =0 ; i <XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ; i++) { +for (i =0 ; i < num_apus; i++) {object_initialize (&s->apu_cpu[i],sizeof (s->apu_cpu[i]),"cortex-a53-" TYPE_ARM_CPU ); object_property_add_child(obj, "apu-cpu[*]", OBJECT(&s->apu_cpu[i]),@@ -182,6 +184,7 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp)MemoryRegion *system_memory =get_system_memory ();uint8_t i;uint64_t ram_size; +int num_apus =MIN (smp_cpus,XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS );const char *boot_cpu = s->boot_cpu ? s->boot_cpu :"apu-cpu[0]" ;ram_addr_t ddr_low_size, ddr_high_size;qemu_irq gic_spi[GIC_NUM_SPI_INTR ];@@ -233,10 +236,10 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp)qdev_prop_set_uint32 (DEVICE (&s->gic),"num-irq" ,GIC_NUM_SPI_INTR +32 );qdev_prop_set_uint32 (DEVICE (&s->gic),"revision" ,2 ); -qdev_prop_set_uint32 (DEVICE (&s->gic),"num-cpu" ,XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ); +qdev_prop_set_uint32 (DEVICE (&s->gic),"num-cpu" , num_apus);/* Realize APUs before realizing the GIC. KVM requires this. */ -for (i =0 ; i <XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ; i++) { +for (i =0 ; i < num_apus; i++) {char *name; object_property_set_int(OBJECT(&s->apu_cpu[i]), QEMU_PSCI_CONDUIT_SMC,@@ -292,7 +295,7 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) } } -for (i =0 ; i <XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ; i++) { +for (i =0 ; i < num_apus; i++) {qemu_irq irq; sysbus_connect_irq(SYS_BUS_DEVICE(&s->gic), i,@@ -307,11 +310,14 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) }hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) · line 315
Quoted 10 lines
hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c +3
-5if (s->has_rpu) { -xlnx_zynqmp_create_rpu (s, boot_cpu, &err); -if (err) { -error_propagate (errp, err); -return ; - } +info_report ("The 'has_rpu' property is no longer required, to use the " +"RPUs just use -smp 6." ); + }Is "-global driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on" without an explicit -smp option supposed to be a supported configuration?
0) On current master, we have this:
$ ./aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 -machine xlnx-zcu102 -global driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on ** ERROR:/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/tcg/tcg.c:538:tcg_register_thread: assertion failed: (n < max_cpus) Aborted (core dumped)1) With your patch we have this:
$ ./aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 -machine xlnx-zcu102 -global driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on -monitor stdio QEMU 2.10.50 monitor - type 'help' for more information (qemu) qemu-system-aarch64: info: The 'has_rpu' property is no longer required, to use the RPUs just use -smp 6. (qemu) info cpus * CPU #0: thread_id=1662 (qemu)2) With your patch plus Emilio's original min_cpus/default_cpus proposal[1], we have this:
$ ./aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 -machine xlnx-zcu102 -global driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on -monitor stdio QEMU 2.10.50 monitor - type 'help' for more information (qemu) qemu-system-aarch64: info: The 'has_rpu' property is no longer required, to use the RPUs just use -smp 6. (qemu) info cpus * CPU #0: thread_id=7112 CPU #1: (halted) thread_id=7113 CPU #2: (halted) thread_id=7114 CPU #3: (halted) thread_id=7115 (qemu)3) With Emilio's
max_additional_cpusproposal[2], we have this:$ ./aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 -machine xlnx-zcu102 -global driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on -monitor stdio QEMU 2.10.50 monitor - type 'help' for more information (qemu) info cpus * CPU #0: thread_id=4045 CPU #1: (halted) thread_id=4046 CPU #2: (halted) thread_id=4047 CPU #3: (halted) thread_id=4048 CPU #4: (halted) thread_id=4049 CPU #5: (halted) thread_id=4050 (qemu)
Quoted 3 lines
Which option is preferred? I like option #2 because it's simpler, but I would like to confirm this is really the intended behavior.
After this patch (and the fix to TCG otherwise it seg faults) no one should use the has_rpu property. It is ignored and will print a message saying that it is ignored.
Users should only use the -smp option now. So option 2 is the way to go.
Thanks,
Alistair
Quoted 20 lines
[1] https://mid.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
[2] https://mid.mail-archive.com/20171106215454.GB2152@flamencoQuoted 11 lines
hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c +5
-1+ +xlnx_zynqmp_create_rpu (s, boot_cpu, &err); +if (err) { +error_propagate (errp, err); +return ; }if (!s->boot_cpu_ptr) { --2.11.0
--
Eduardo
Eduardo Habkost
Reviewed-byRe: [Qemu-arm] [PATCH v1 1/2] xlnx-zynqmp: Properly support the smp command line option
Quoted 146 lines · Alistair Francis
Quoted 141 lines · Eduardo Habkost
Quoted 82 lines · Alistair Francis
Allow the -smp command line option to control the number of CPUs we create.
Signed-off-by Alistair Francis <[email protected]>---
hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c | 3 ++- hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++---------- 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)hw/arm/xlnx-zcu102.c +2
-1@@ -235,7 +235,8 @@ static void xlnx_zcu102_machine_class_init(ObjectClass *oc, void *data) {MachineClass *mc =MACHINE_CLASS (oc); - mc->desc ="Xilinx ZynqMP ZCU102 board" ; + mc->desc ="Xilinx ZynqMP ZCU102 board with 4xA53s and 2xR5s based on " \ +"the value of smp" ; mc->init = xlnx_zcu102_init; mc->block_default_type =IF_IDE ; mc->units_per_default_bus =1 ;hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c +8
-5@@ -98,8 +98,9 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_create_rpu(XlnxZynqMPState *s, const char *boot_cpu, {Error *err =NULL ;int i; +int num_rpus =MIN (smp_cpus -XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ,XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_RPU_CPUS ); -for (i =0 ; i <XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_RPU_CPUS ; i++) { +for (i =0 ; i < num_rpus; i++) {char *name; object_initialize(&s->rpu_cpu[i], sizeof(s->rpu_cpu[i]),@@ -132,8 +133,9 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_init(Object *obj) {XlnxZynqMPState *s =XLNX_ZYNQMP (obj);int i; +int num_apus =MIN (smp_cpus,XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ); -for (i =0 ; i <XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ; i++) { +for (i =0 ; i < num_apus; i++) {object_initialize (&s->apu_cpu[i],sizeof (s->apu_cpu[i]),"cortex-a53-" TYPE_ARM_CPU ); object_property_add_child(obj, "apu-cpu[*]", OBJECT(&s->apu_cpu[i]),@@ -182,6 +184,7 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp)MemoryRegion *system_memory =get_system_memory ();uint8_t i;uint64_t ram_size; +int num_apus =MIN (smp_cpus,XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS );const char *boot_cpu = s->boot_cpu ? s->boot_cpu :"apu-cpu[0]" ;ram_addr_t ddr_low_size, ddr_high_size;qemu_irq gic_spi[GIC_NUM_SPI_INTR ];@@ -233,10 +236,10 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp)qdev_prop_set_uint32 (DEVICE (&s->gic),"num-irq" ,GIC_NUM_SPI_INTR +32 );qdev_prop_set_uint32 (DEVICE (&s->gic),"revision" ,2 ); -qdev_prop_set_uint32 (DEVICE (&s->gic),"num-cpu" ,XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ); +qdev_prop_set_uint32 (DEVICE (&s->gic),"num-cpu" , num_apus);/* Realize APUs before realizing the GIC. KVM requires this. */ -for (i =0 ; i <XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ; i++) { +for (i =0 ; i < num_apus; i++) {char *name; object_property_set_int(OBJECT(&s->apu_cpu[i]), QEMU_PSCI_CONDUIT_SMC,@@ -292,7 +295,7 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) } } -for (i =0 ; i <XLNX_ZYNQMP_NUM_APU_CPUS ; i++) { +for (i =0 ; i < num_apus; i++) {qemu_irq irq; sysbus_connect_irq(SYS_BUS_DEVICE(&s->gic), i,@@ -307,11 +310,14 @@ static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) }hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c static void xlnx_zynqmp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) · line 315
Quoted 10 lines
hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c +3
-5if (s->has_rpu) { -xlnx_zynqmp_create_rpu (s, boot_cpu, &err); -if (err) { -error_propagate (errp, err); -return ; - } +info_report ("The 'has_rpu' property is no longer required, to use the " +"RPUs just use -smp 6." ); + }Is "-global driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on" without an explicit -smp option supposed to be a supported configuration?
0) On current master, we have this:
$ ./aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 -machine xlnx-zcu102 -global driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on ** ERROR:/home/ehabkost/rh/proj/virt/qemu/tcg/tcg.c:538:tcg_register_thread: assertion failed: (n < max_cpus) Aborted (core dumped)1) With your patch we have this:
$ ./aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 -machine xlnx-zcu102 -global driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on -monitor stdio QEMU 2.10.50 monitor - type 'help' for more information (qemu) qemu-system-aarch64: info: The 'has_rpu' property is no longer required, to use the RPUs just use -smp 6. (qemu) info cpus * CPU #0: thread_id=1662 (qemu)2) With your patch plus Emilio's original min_cpus/default_cpus proposal[1], we have this:
$ ./aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 -machine xlnx-zcu102 -global driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on -monitor stdio QEMU 2.10.50 monitor - type 'help' for more information (qemu) qemu-system-aarch64: info: The 'has_rpu' property is no longer required, to use the RPUs just use -smp 6. (qemu) info cpus * CPU #0: thread_id=7112 CPU #1: (halted) thread_id=7113 CPU #2: (halted) thread_id=7114 CPU #3: (halted) thread_id=7115 (qemu)3) With Emilio's
max_additional_cpusproposal[2], we have this:$ ./aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64 -machine xlnx-zcu102 -global driver=xlnx,,zynqmp,property=has_rpu,value=on -monitor stdio QEMU 2.10.50 monitor - type 'help' for more information (qemu) info cpus * CPU #0: thread_id=4045 CPU #1: (halted) thread_id=4046 CPU #2: (halted) thread_id=4047 CPU #3: (halted) thread_id=4048 CPU #4: (halted) thread_id=4049 CPU #5: (halted) thread_id=4050 (qemu)Quoted 3 lines
Which option is preferred? I like option #2 because it's simpler, but I would like to confirm this is really the intended behavior.
Quoted 5 lines
After this patch (and the fix to TCG otherwise it seg faults) no one should use the
has_rpuproperty. It is ignored and will print a message saying that it is ignored.Users should only use the -smp option now. So option 2 is the way to go.
Sounds reasonable to me.
I just sent one small comment to the min_cpus/default_cpus patch at [1], and I'm waiting for Richard's input on Emilio's TCG fix[3].
[3] https://mid.mail-archive.com/20171106201332.GA2152@flamenco
Quoted 24 lines
Thanks,
AlistairQuoted 20 lines
[1] https://mid.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
[2] https://mid.mail-archive.com/20171106215454.GB2152@flamencoQuoted 11 lines
hw/arm/xlnx-zynqmp.c +5
-1+ +xlnx_zynqmp_create_rpu (s, boot_cpu, &err); +if (err) { +error_propagate (errp, err); +return ; }if (!s->boot_cpu_ptr) { --2.11.0
--
Eduardo
Signature · 1 line
Eduardo