Re: [RFC PATCH 1/3] target/openrisc: Add basic support for semihosting

[Richard Henderson]

On 6/4/22 17:57, Stafford Horne wrote:
> I am kind of leaning towards dropping the semi-hosting patches and only moving
> forward with the virt patches.  The reason being that 1. we would not need to
> expand the architecture spec to support the qemu virt platform, and we would
> need to document the NOP's formally, and 2. OpenRISC doesn't really support the
> full "semihosting" facilities for file open/close/write etc.

I agree that "virt" would to more for openrisc devel than these nops.

> Also, if we have virt I can't imagine anyone using the semihosting much.

IMO, semihosting is most valuable for writing regression tests and not much more.  (You 
have no control over the exit status of qemu with normal shutdown, as compared with 
semihosting exit.)


r~