On 5 July 2016 at 21:31, Michael Rolnik <mrol...@gmail.com> wrote: > <quote> > As Richard says you have problems with trying to write > CPU registers from a device anyway, but please consider > trying to have some level of abstraction rather than > just having the device code reach into the CPU object. > The general model here is real hardware and devices, and > a real device has no access into the inside workings of > another one except via whatever interfaces the other > device explicitly provides. > > (Better still would be if we don't need to do any of this > at all, because it gets pretty ugly pretty quickly. > The guest has access to its own registers by definition, > so having a second way to read and write them via memory > is a bit weird.) > </quote> > > The code is already fixed.
I just looked back at the v9 patch, and it is still just directly reaching into the CPU object, which is what I suggested you do not want to do. thanks -- PMM
