On Tue, Apr 04, 2017 at 09:12:59AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote:
>
>
> > Am 04.04.2017 um 09:05 schrieb Thomas Huth :
> >
> >> On 03.04.2017 22:05, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 08:42:12PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 3 April 2017 at 19:30, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> Am 04.04.2017 um 09:05 schrieb Thomas Huth :
>
>> On 03.04.2017 22:05, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 08:42:12PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 3 April 2017 at 19:30, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 03:08:06PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On
On 03.04.2017 22:05, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 08:42:12PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 3 April 2017 at 19:30, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 03:08:06PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 3 April 2017 at 14:54, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> This, on
On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 08:42:12PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 3 April 2017 at 19:30, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 03:08:06PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> On 3 April 2017 at 14:54, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> >> > This, on the other hand, currently works:
> >> > $ qe
On 3 April 2017 at 19:30, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 03:08:06PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 3 April 2017 at 14:54, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>> > This, on the other hand, currently works:
>> > $ qemu-system-x86_64 -M q35 -device
>> > unimplemented-device,size=1024,name
On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 03:08:06PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 3 April 2017 at 14:54, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 02:38:15PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> On 3 April 2017 at 14:34, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> >> >> Wouldn't it be better to just not add that, rather tha
On 3 April 2017 at 14:54, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 02:38:15PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 3 April 2017 at 14:34, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>> >> Wouldn't it be better to just not add that, rather than
>> >> add it and then delete it?
>> >
>> > The device was already use
On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 02:38:15PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 3 April 2017 at 14:34, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> >> Wouldn't it be better to just not add that, rather than
> >> add it and then delete it?
> >
> > The device was already user-creatable
>
> It doesn't seem to be:
>
> ./build/x86
On 3 April 2017 at 14:34, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
>> Wouldn't it be better to just not add that, rather than
>> add it and then delete it?
>
> The device was already user-creatable
It doesn't seem to be:
./build/x86/arm-softmmu/qemu-system-arm -M virt -device
unimplemented-device,size=1024,name=
On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 01:57:06PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 1 April 2017 at 01:46, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > unimplemented-device needs to be created and mapped using
> > create_unimplemented_device()
>
> This isn't correct -- create_unimplemented_device() is
> just a utility function; y
On 1 April 2017 at 01:46, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> unimplemented-device needs to be created and mapped using
> create_unimplemented_device()
This isn't correct -- create_unimplemented_device() is
just a utility function; you can create, configure, initialize
and map it "by hand" if you want.
> a
On 03/31/2017 09:46 PM, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
unimplemented-device needs to be created and mapped using
create_unimplemented_device(), and won't work with -device.
Remove the user_creatable flag from the device class.
Cc: Peter Maydell
Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost
Reviewed-by: Philippe Ma
unimplemented-device needs to be created and mapped using
create_unimplemented_device(), and won't work with -device.
Remove the user_creatable flag from the device class.
Cc: Peter Maydell
Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost
---
hw/misc/unimp.c | 5 -
1 file changed, 5 deletions(-)
diff --git
13 matches
Mail list logo
