On Mon, Oct 22, 2007 at 01:47:42AM +0100, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
> > This seems like a good excuse to send my suggested -cpu option for the
> > x86 target. It is just like my previous "take 4", but fits to the newly
> > unified cpu_list.
>
> Leads to an instant segfault for t
Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
> This seems like a good excuse to send my suggested -cpu option for the
> x86 target. It is just like my previous "take 4", but fits to the newly
> unified cpu_list.
Leads to an instant segfault for the i386 usermode emulation.
Thiemo
On Fri, 2007-10-12 at 10:54 +0200, Dan Kenigsberg wrote:
> This seems like a good excuse to send my suggested -cpu option for the
> x86 target. It is just like my previous "take 4", but fits to the newly
> unified cpu_list.
I don't know x86 so well to comment the x86 CPU definitions, but having
th
This seems like a good excuse to send my suggested -cpu option for the
x86 target. It is just like my previous "take 4", but fits to the newly
unified cpu_list.
Index: hw/pc.c
===
RCS file: /sources/qemu/qemu/hw/pc.c,v
retrieving re
Forwarded Message
> From: J. Mayer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
> To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
> Subject: [Qemu-devel] RFC: avoid #ifdef for target cpu list
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 07:14:22 +0200
>
> This tiny patch unifies th
This tiny patch unifies the -cpu ? option for all cpu that actually can
handle it.
It changes the arm_cpu_list to use the same prototype as ppc, mips and
sparc and add a new define cpu_list in target_xxx/cpu.h
As the cpu selection is not implemented for all targets, I had to
protect the call to cpu
