qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/17 v3] LatticeMico32 target


From: Edgar E. Iglesias
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/17 v3] LatticeMico32 target
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 14:20:09 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 11:47:55PM +0100, Michael Walle wrote:
> Am Dienstag 01 März 2011, 22:31:58 schrieb Edgar E. Iglesias:
> > On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 12:03:37AM +0100, Michael Walle wrote:
> > > Am Donnerstag 17 Februar 2011, 23:45:01 schrieb Michael Walle:
> > > > This patchset adds support for the LatticeMico32 softcore processor by
> > > > Lattice Semiconductor.
> > > > 
> > > > Changes since v2:
> > > >  - lots of CODING_STYLE fixes
> > > >  - reworked pic and juart model, CPUState is not passed anymore
> > > >  - use qdev reset field instead of qemu_register_reset()
> > > >  - add missing include guards
> > > >  - merged lm32_pic_cpu.c into boards file
> > > >  - removed buggy qemu_irq_lower() in reset functions
> > > >  - converted hw_error to error_report()
> > > > 
> > > > Changes since v1:
> > > >  - removed variables which are no longer in use
> > > >  - replaced some tcg ops with specialized ones
> > > >  - kill VM in case of an unknown opcode
> > > >  - fixed tracepoints format strings to match existing ones
> > > 
> > > Any comments/reviews on this patchset?
> > > 
> > > I've changed the opcode decoding to use a lookup table instead of the
> > > for- loop. If you don't mind, i would submit a patch after the above is
> > > merged. Or, alternatively, if there is another patchset version, i'll
> > > integrate it into that ;)
> > 
> > Hi, lets do v3 first.
> > 
> > Do you have a public tree to pull from?
> My git repository is at:
> http://git.serverraum.org/git/mw/qemu-lm32.git/
> 
> There i create a tag 'for-upstream-v3' which contains the patchset rebased on 
> the latest official HEAD.

Thanks, I've applied v3.

Got a conflict on patch nr 16 though. Would be good if you could double check
upstreams configure to verify I resolved it correctly...

Cheers



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]