On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 8:33 PM, Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote: > Am 10.10.2012 17:35, schrieb Max Filippov: >> On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 7:15 PM, Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote: >>> Am 23.05.2012 05:08, schrieb Andreas Färber: >>>> Needed for cpu_has_work(). >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> >>> >>> Max, could you ack this trivial patch please? It still applies. >> >> Well, it does but why do you want to add a level of indirection here? >> Does that mean that cpu->env may change during cpu lifetime? >> Commit message is not very helpful here. > > Patch 43/59 in that series updates cpu_has_work() argument to CPUState*, > thus this patch prepares xtensa_pic as one of the callers. > > This is the only xtensa patch I have in my queue, so I wanted to avoid > hitting you with a large resend. > > I see now that xtensa_set_irq could get an XtensaCPU opaque as well, but > so far there was no need apparently, so that can be changed later. > > For target-specific code my general rule of thumb is, use FooCPU rather > than CPUFooState arguments and opaques wherever possible since the need > is growing. Also, any new fields that are not accessed by TCG should be > placed into FooCPU rather than CPUFooState.
Ok, Acked-by: Max Filippov <jcmvb...@gmail.com> -- Thanks. -- Max
