On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 10:13:17PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> I will take a look, CONFIG_USER_ONLY is definitely something that should be
> poisoned.
Thanks! I started looking at it, but I gave up when I realized
how much work it would required. :)
In any case, feel free to reuse the 2 small
I will take a look, CONFIG_USER_ONLY is definitely something that should be
poisoned.
Paolo
Il gio 17 dic 2020, 21:26 Peter Maydell ha
scritto:
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 20:15, Peter Maydell
> wrote:
> > (So in theory we could make CONFIG_USER_ONLY
> > a poisoned identifier but that will requir
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 08:15:38PM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 19:46, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to highlight the current dangerous state of NEED_CPU_H /
> > CONFIG_SOFTMMU / CONFIG_USER_ONLY.
>
> > So our struct TcgCpuOperations in include/h
On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 20:15, Peter Maydell wrote:
> (So in theory we could make CONFIG_USER_ONLY
> a poisoned identifier but that will require some work to
> adjust places where we currently use it in "safe" ways...)
Specifically, putting it in poison.h turns up these places
that would need to b
On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 at 19:46, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like to highlight the current dangerous state of NEED_CPU_H /
> CONFIG_SOFTMMU / CONFIG_USER_ONLY.
> So our struct TcgCpuOperations in include/hw/core/cpu.h,
> which contains after this series:
>
> #ifndef CONFIG_USER_ONLY
Hi,
I would like to highlight the current dangerous state of NEED_CPU_H /
CONFIG_SOFTMMU / CONFIG_USER_ONLY.
This patch of mine (the last in the i386 cleanup PART 2) breaks check-tcg.
The why is not obvious at all. I'll comment below it.
On 12/11/20 11:09 AM, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> centraliz
centralize the calls to cpu->accel_cpu_interface
Signed-off-by: Claudio Fontana
---
include/hw/core/cpu.h | 6 ++
hw/core/cpu.c | 9 +
target/i386/cpu.c | 9 ++---
3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/hw/core/cpu.h b/include/hw/core/
