From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:47027)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <chouteau@adacore.com>) id 1QbTUq-00039N-KG
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 04:18:13 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <chouteau@adacore.com>) id 1QbTUO-0003Go-PG
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 04:18:12 -0400
Received: from mel.act-europe.fr ([194.98.77.210]:50645)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <chouteau@adacore.com>) id 1QbTUO-0003Gk-FZ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 04:17:44 -0400
Message-ID: <4E098E23.3040605@adacore.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 10:17:39 +0200
From: Fabien Chouteau <chouteau@adacore.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1309180555-3942-1-git-send-email-chouteau@adacore.com>
	<20110627112807.22346e82@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net>
In-Reply-To: <20110627112807.22346e82@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Add e500 instructions dcblc,
 dcbtls and dcbtstl as no-op
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 27/06/2011 18:28, Scott Wood wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 15:15:55 +0200
> Fabien Chouteau <chouteau@adacore.com> wrote:
>
>> +/* dcbtls */
>> +static void gen_dcbtls(DisasContext *ctx)
>> +{
>> +    /* interpreted as no-op */
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* dcbtstls */
>> +static void gen_dcbtstls(DisasContext *ctx)
>> +{
>> +    /* interpreted as no-op */
>> +}
>
> Set L1CSR0[CUL] (unable to lock)?

Why do you want to set this bit? Can't we consider that the instruction is
always effective?

-- 
Fabien Chouteau