On 10/23/2012 02:55 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Avi Kivity writes:
>
>> target_phys_addr_t is unwieldly, violates the C standard (_t suffixes are
>> reserved) and its purpose doesn't match the name (most target_phys_addr_t
>> addresses are not target specific). Replace it with a finger-friendly
On 10/23/2012 03:04 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 23 October 2012 11:30, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> target_phys_addr_t is unwieldly, violates the C standard (_t suffixes are
>> reserved) and its purpose doesn't match the name (most target_phys_addr_t
>> addresses are not target specific). Replace it wi
Il 23/10/2012 14:55, Anthony Liguori ha scritto:
>> > target_phys_addr_t is unwieldly, violates the C standard (_t suffixes are
>> > reserved) and its purpose doesn't match the name (most target_phys_addr_t
>> > addresses are not target specific). Replace it with a finger-friendly,
>> > standards
On 23 October 2012 11:30, Avi Kivity wrote:
> target_phys_addr_t is unwieldly, violates the C standard (_t suffixes are
> reserved) and its purpose doesn't match the name (most target_phys_addr_t
> addresses are not target specific). Replace it with a finger-friendly,
> standards conformant hwadd
Il 23/10/2012 14:55, Anthony Liguori ha scritto:
>> > Outstanding patchsets can be fixed up with the command
>> >
>> > git rebase -i --exec 'find -name "*.[ch]"
>> > | xargs s/target_phys_addr_t/hwaddr/g' origin
> We're getting pretty close to soft freeze so perhaps it's t
