On 19.06.2015 00:01, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 18 June 2015 at 21:57, Sergey Fedorov wrote:
>> On 18.06.2015 23:46, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> On 17 June 2015 at 16:25, Sergey Fedorov wrote:
cp_reg_reset() is called from g_hash_table_foreach() which does not
define a specific ordering o
On 18 June 2015 at 21:57, Sergey Fedorov wrote:
> On 18.06.2015 23:46, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 17 June 2015 at 16:25, Sergey Fedorov wrote:
>>> cp_reg_reset() is called from g_hash_table_foreach() which does not
>>> define a specific ordering of the hash table iteration. Thus doing reset
>>> f
On 18.06.2015 23:46, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 17 June 2015 at 16:25, Sergey Fedorov wrote:
>> cp_reg_reset() is called from g_hash_table_foreach() which does not
>> define a specific ordering of the hash table iteration. Thus doing reset
>> for registers marked as ALIAS would give an ambiguous re
On 17 June 2015 at 16:25, Sergey Fedorov wrote:
> cp_reg_reset() is called from g_hash_table_foreach() which does not
> define a specific ordering of the hash table iteration. Thus doing reset
> for registers marked as ALIAS would give an ambiguous result when
> resetvalue is different for origina
cp_reg_reset() is called from g_hash_table_foreach() which does not
define a specific ordering of the hash table iteration. Thus doing reset
for registers marked as ALIAS would give an ambiguous result when
resetvalue is different for original and alias resisters. Exit
cp_reg_reset() early when pas
