On 21 December 2011 11:07, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 21 December 2011 01:38, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
>> Since this sub device uses parts of the rest of mpu state, it's
>> (apparently) not a separate device, can we thus skip this change? I
>> don't see much value in it and it doesn't simplify c
On 21 December 2011 01:38, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> Since this sub device uses parts of the rest of mpu state, it's
> (apparently) not a separate device, can we thus skip this change? I
> don't see much value in it and it doesn't simplify code.
If you like; I don't have a very strong feeling
On 20 December 2011 19:11, Peter Maydell wrote:
> From: Juha Riihimäki
>
> Signed-off-by: Juha Riihimäki
> [Riku Voipio: Fixes and restructuring patchset]
> Signed-off-by: Riku Voipio
> [Peter Maydell: More fixes and cleanups for upstream submission]
> Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell
> ---
> hw
From: Juha Riihimäki
Signed-off-by: Juha Riihimäki
[Riku Voipio: Fixes and restructuring patchset]
Signed-off-by: Riku Voipio
[Peter Maydell: More fixes and cleanups for upstream submission]
Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell
---
hw/omap.h | 16 +---
hw/omap1.c | 127 ++
