Am 24.06.2015 um 19:04 schrieb Peter Crosthwaite: > On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 3:01 AM, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> > wrote: >> On 24 June 2015 at 03:50, Peter Crosthwaite >> <peter.crosthwa...@xilinx.com> wrote: >>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote: >>>> I believe this argument will probably go away; otherwise this should've >>>> been &error_abort or something instead of NULL. >>>> >>> >>> I'm not sure. As I don't see what is catching the case of a gdb 'c' >>> packet for a CPU that doesn't implement set_pc. I'd rather preserve >>> the existing behaviour, and have the qom wrapper do nothing if it is >>> not implemented. >> >> Well, this is one reason why every CPU needs to implement set_pc... >> > > Well. I guess it works for a common case where a continue doesn't > change the PC? If the debugger doesn't change the PC the "c" should > work even without a set_pc call so we don't want to assert on this > valid use case.
Guys, is there any target that does not implement set_pc today? If so, which? I'd rather implement it than carry around the iffery and resulting complications. I quickly counted 17 target-* in my tree and all 17 seemed to show up in git-grep. Can you confirm? Didn't check the latest tilegx series. Regards, Andreas -- SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Dilip Upmanyu, Graham Norton; HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
