Re: [PATCH] gdbstub: move update guest debug to accel ops

2023-02-07 Thread Mads Ynddal
> > Sorry this dropped of my radar. Yes I think the ifdef will do. Are you > going to post a v2 with all the various updates? > No worries, I'll make a v2 with the changes. — Mads Ynddal

Re: [PATCH] gdbstub: move update guest debug to accel ops

2023-02-06 Thread Alex Bennée
Mads Ynddal writes: >> It will do. You could just call it update_guest_debug as it is an >> internal static function although I guess that makes grepping a bit of a >> pain. > > I agree. It should preferably be something unique, to ease grep'ing. > >> Is something being accidentally linked with

Re: [PATCH] gdbstub: move update guest debug to accel ops

2022-12-20 Thread Mads Ynddal
> It will do. You could just call it update_guest_debug as it is an > internal static function although I guess that makes grepping a bit of a > pain. I agree. It should preferably be something unique, to ease grep'ing. > Is something being accidentally linked with linux-user and softmmu? Good

Re: [PATCH] gdbstub: move update guest debug to accel ops

2022-12-14 Thread Alex Bennée
Mads Ynddal writes: >> Isn't this '0' flag here accelerator-specific? ... > >> ... if so the prototype should be: >> >> int (*update_guest_debug)(CPUState *cpu); >> >> and the '0' value set within kvm-accel-ops.c handler implementation. >> > > You're right, we can avoid the additional

Re: [PATCH] gdbstub: move update guest debug to accel ops

2022-11-24 Thread Mads Ynddal
> Isn't this '0' flag here accelerator-specific? ... > ... if so the prototype should be: > > int (*update_guest_debug)(CPUState *cpu); > > and the '0' value set within kvm-accel-ops.c handler implementation. > You're right, we can avoid the additional variable. We'll then have to wrap

Re: [PATCH] gdbstub: move update guest debug to accel ops

2022-11-23 Thread Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
Hi, On 23/11/22 13:17, Mads Ynddal wrote: From: Mads Ynddal Continuing the refactor of a48e7d9e52 (gdbstub: move guest debug support check to ops) by removing hardcoded kvm_enabled() from generic cpu.c code, and replace it with a property of AccelOpsClass. Signed-off-by: Mads Ynddal --- ac

Re: [PATCH] gdbstub: move update guest debug to accel ops

2022-11-23 Thread Mads Ynddal
> On 23 Nov 2022, at 15.05, Alex Bennée wrote: > > Nice. Looks good to me but I'll have a proper look when I go through my > gdbstub/next queue. I don't think this is critical for 7.2. > Thanks, and I agree. It can easily wait.

Re: [PATCH] gdbstub: move update guest debug to accel ops

2022-11-23 Thread Alex Bennée
Mads Ynddal writes: > From: Mads Ynddal > > Continuing the refactor of a48e7d9e52 (gdbstub: move guest debug support > check to ops) by removing hardcoded kvm_enabled() from generic cpu.c > code, and replace it with a property of AccelOpsClass. > > Signed-off-by: Mads Ynddal Nice. Looks good

Re: [PATCH] gdbstub: move update guest debug to accel ops

2022-11-23 Thread Mads Ynddal
> On 23 Nov 2022, at 13.17, Mads Ynddal wrote: > > From: Mads Ynddal > > Continuing the refactor of a48e7d9e52 (gdbstub: move guest debug support > check to ops) by removing hardcoded kvm_enabled() from generic cpu.c > code, and replace it with a property of AccelOpsClass. > > Signed-off-by:

[PATCH] gdbstub: move update guest debug to accel ops

2022-11-23 Thread Mads Ynddal
From: Mads Ynddal Continuing the refactor of a48e7d9e52 (gdbstub: move guest debug support check to ops) by removing hardcoded kvm_enabled() from generic cpu.c code, and replace it with a property of AccelOpsClass. Signed-off-by: Mads Ynddal --- accel/kvm/kvm-accel-ops.c | 1 + cpu.c