On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 9:21 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 19 January 2014 01:46, Peter Crosthwaite
> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Peter Maydell
>> wrote:
>>> IIRC ARMv4 and earlier didn't define the MIDR, but we don't
>>> actually emulate any of those. In general, my intent with
On 19 January 2014 01:46, Peter Crosthwaite
wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Peter Maydell
> wrote:
>> IIRC ARMv4 and earlier didn't define the MIDR, but we don't
>> actually emulate any of those. In general, my intent with all these
>> constant fields in the ARMCPU struct was that we'd
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Peter Maydell
wrote:
> On 19 January 2014 00:59, Peter Crosthwaite
> wrote:
>> Do you even need this now? The normal arrayified dc->props properties
>> are added at device::init time. As TYPE_DEVICE is a parent class, its
>> init function is called before CPUs (n
On 19 January 2014 00:59, Peter Crosthwaite
wrote:
> Do you even need this now? The normal arrayified dc->props properties
> are added at device::init time. As TYPE_DEVICE is a parent class, its
> init function is called before CPUs (normal inits are called in
> parent->child order, the post_inits
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 9:48 AM, Alistair Francis
wrote:
> Convert the MIDR register to a property. This allows boards to later set
> a custom MIDR value. This has been done in such a way to maintain
> compatibility with all existing CPUs and boards
>
> Signed-off-by: Alistair Francis
> ---
> I o
Convert the MIDR register to a property. This allows boards to later set
a custom MIDR value. This has been done in such a way to maintain
compatibility with all existing CPUs and boards
Signed-off-by: Alistair Francis
---
I originally added the properties to the cpu->midr variable in a similar
m
