On 19.06.2015 00:01, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 18 June 2015 at 21:57, Sergey Fedorov <serge.f...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 18.06.2015 23:46, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> On 17 June 2015 at 16:25, Sergey Fedorov <serge.f...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> cp_reg_reset() is called from g_hash_table_foreach() which does not >>>> define a specific ordering of the hash table iteration. Thus doing reset >>>> for registers marked as ALIAS would give an ambiguous result when >>>> resetvalue is different for original and alias resisters. >>> Was this actually the case for any of our registers? ie, is this >>> patch fixing a bug, or just cleaning up a potential cause of >>> confusion? >> Peter, I discovered such a confusing behavior for PMCR register and >> decided to sort this out. > Ah yes, nice catch. I'll fix up the commit message. > > -- PMM
Thanks!
