From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Fo0yy-0004z5-SC
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2006 12:34:12 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Fo0yw-0004tH-9v
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2006 12:34:11 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fo0yw-0004t8-3x
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2006 12:34:10 -0400
Received: from [65.74.133.6] (helo=mail.codesourcery.com)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1Fo16Z-0004ir-08
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 07 Jun 2006 12:42:03 -0400
From: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] I want to add the ARMv6 instructions,
	who can give some advices?
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2006 17:34:05 +0100
References: <39134b110606070011y1ea95f6bh5e64468bc5b53c04@mail.gmail.com>
	<200606071658.27892.paul@codesourcery.com>
	<20060607161823.GA31417@mail.shareable.org>
In-Reply-To: <20060607161823.GA31417@mail.shareable.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200606071734.06090.paul@codesourcery.com>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

> So would you have any problem contributing to Qemu after ARMv6 support
> was integrated, if the person who contributes ARMv6 support states
> that they have never seen the ARM document and refers to the sources
> they have used instead?

As I mentioned before I have significant local patches implementing unreleased 
Arm features. The only way to avoid cross contamination between that and a 
third party qemu implementation two would be for me to stop contributing 
anything (or at minimum anything ARM related) back to qemu.

Basing work on the gcc/binutils code doesn't help me either because I wrote 
most of that code in the first place :-)

Paul