From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KryQA-0005Cl-69
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:19:58 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KryQ8-0005Bf-Df
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:19:57 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=42083 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KryQ8-0005BS-0A
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:19:56 -0400
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([65.74.133.4]:37109)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <paul@codesourcery.com>) id 1KryQ7-0006gH-P1
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:19:56 -0400
From: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] SH: Add prefi, icbi, synco
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2008 18:19:51 +0100
References: <200810171652.46611.vladimir@codesourcery.com>
	<200810201154.21179.paul@codesourcery.com>
	<761ea48b0810201015k42a02241r638eae16e24364bf@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <761ea48b0810201015k42a02241r638eae16e24364bf@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200810201819.51767.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
Cc: Laurent Desnogues <laurent.desnogues@gmail.com>

On Monday 20 October 2008, Laurent Desnogues wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 12:54 PM, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> > Doing fine grained features isn't that
> > hard. MIPS, sparc, arm, ppc, m68k and sparc already do this.
>
> So let's say someone finds some unprotected use of some ARM
> instructions, should that be reported and is there any hope the
> patch will ever be considered by the maintainer of the ARM target?
> (Examples are ldrex/strex and ubfx/sbfx.)

Yes.

> Also what about undetected undefined instructions which I asked
> about last May?
>
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2008-05/msg00844.html
>
> Given the lack of answer at that time, I thought it didn't matter.  I now
> see I was wrong.  It's a pity communication is almost impossible.

Rejecting incorrect patches is always easier than verifying that patches are 
correct.

Paul