On 04/18/2012 04:24 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 18.04.2012, at 18:27, Scott Wood wrote: > >> On 04/18/2012 10:40 AM, Alexander Graf wrote: >>> On 04/15/2012 06:14 PM, Andreas Färber wrote: >>>> diff --git a/target-ppc/translate_init.c b/target-ppc/translate_init.c >>>> index 86a915c..ba4b84d 100644 >>>> --- a/target-ppc/translate_init.c >>>> +++ b/target-ppc/translate_init.c >>>> @@ -4462,36 +4462,32 @@ static void init_proc_e500 (CPUPPCState *env, >>>> int version) >>>> &spr_read_spefscr,&spr_write_spefscr, >>>> 0x00000000); >>>> /* Memory management */ >>>> -#if !defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY) >>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY) >>>> + env->dcache_line_size = 32; >>>> + env->icache_line_size = 32; >>>> +#else /* !defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY) */ >>> >>> I don't think I like this one. If you're running linux-user with a >>> specific CPU (not the generic "I am the common ground" CPU) >> >> But how much value is there really in doing that, that justifies a bunch >> of ifdefs in the per-CPU code? > > As much value as in allowing specific CPUs to be selected in the first place.
Right, I was wondering how much sense it makes to select a particular CPU for user-only, or whether it might make more sense to just select particular user-visible features. The right answer is probably just to rework all this so that it's more data-driven and we don't need so many ifdefs regardless. -Scott
