From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NSYlc-0002QK-KH
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 11:29:52 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NSYla-0002Ph-Kz
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 11:29:51 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35209 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NSYla-0002Pa-Fq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 11:29:50 -0500
Received: from are.twiddle.net ([75.149.56.221]:52389)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <rth@twiddle.net>) id 1NSYlZ-0007rv-HE
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 06 Jan 2010 11:29:50 -0500
Message-ID: <4B44BA76.7060009@twiddle.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 08:29:42 -0800
From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/6] target-alpha: Reduce internal processor
	registers for user-mode.
References: <cover.1262645165.git.rth@twiddle.net>
	<292071c796105a489c3cfaab6aa52a9a89b6c5f0.1262645165.git.rth@twiddle.net>
	<8B1166FD-E0AE-4A6D-9CD3-53445F282069@adacore.com>
In-Reply-To: <8B1166FD-E0AE-4A6D-9CD3-53445F282069@adacore.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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: Tristan Gingold <gingold@adacore.com>
Cc: QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

On 01/06/2010 01:55 AM, Tristan Gingold wrote:
>> The existing set of IPRs is totally irrelevant to user-mode emulation.
>> Indeed, they most are irrelevant to implementing kernel-mode emulation,
>> and would only be relevant to PAL-mode emulation, which I suspect that
>> no one will ever attempt.
>
> Interesting, that's the approach I used to emulate an es40 (ie full emulation of 21264).
> This had the advantage to be able to use the genuine ROM.

Heh.  Well, far be it for me to disuade.  There's surely room for 
wanting to emulate at that level.

However, since (1) ROMs other than the few supported by MILO are 
probably not redistributable and (2) I have the sense that generic 
kernel stuff would go faster emulating the PALcode specification, I 
think there's also a reason to do it that way too.

All that said, there's currently nothing that distinguishes between 
anything but user-mode and system-mode.

I would be delighted to see your es40 patches...


r~