On Wed, 06 Feb 2013 11:58:26 +0100
Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 05.02.2013 17:39, schrieb Igor Mammedov:
> > From: Andreas Färber
> >
> > Consolidate CPU functions in cpu.c.
> > Allows to make cpu_x86_register() static.
> >
> > No functional changes.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber
>
>
Am 06.02.2013 12:07, schrieb Eduardo Habkost:
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 05:39:20PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
>> From: Andreas Färber
>>
>> Consolidate CPU functions in cpu.c.
>> Allows to make cpu_x86_register() static.
>>
>> No functional changes.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber
>
> Revie
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 05:39:20PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> From: Andreas Färber
>
> Consolidate CPU functions in cpu.c.
> Allows to make cpu_x86_register() static.
>
> No functional changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber
Reviewed-by: Eduardo Habkost
> ---
> target-i386/cpu.c
Am 05.02.2013 17:39, schrieb Igor Mammedov:
> From: Andreas Färber
>
> Consolidate CPU functions in cpu.c.
> Allows to make cpu_x86_register() static.
>
> No functional changes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber
Do we agree that this patch is okay? If you add a Reviewed-by I'll add
it to qom-
From: Andreas Färber
Consolidate CPU functions in cpu.c.
Allows to make cpu_x86_register() static.
No functional changes.
Signed-off-by: Andreas Färber
---
target-i386/cpu.c| 26 +-
target-i386/cpu.h|1 -
target-i386/helper.c | 24 --