From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59592)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <afaerber@suse.de>) id 1VVlkz-0001tu-8C
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2013 13:16:42 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <afaerber@suse.de>) id 1VVlkt-0001rI-Um
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2013 13:16:37 -0400
Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:37129 helo=mx2.suse.de)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <afaerber@suse.de>) id 1VVlkt-0001r3-OP
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2013 13:16:31 -0400
Message-ID: <525C26EA.8010909@suse.de>
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 19:16:26 +0200
From: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= <afaerber@suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1381768175-13520-1-git-send-email-michael@walle.cc>
	<1381768175-13520-8-git-send-email-michael@walle.cc>
In-Reply-To: <1381768175-13520-8-git-send-email-michael@walle.cc>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL v2 07/11] target-lm32: move model features
 to LM32CPU
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: Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Hi,

Am 14.10.2013 18:29, schrieb Michael Walle:
> This allows us to completely remove CPULM32State from DisasContext.
> Instead, copy the fields we need to DisasContext.
>=20
> Cc: Andreas F=C3=A4rber <afaerber@suse.de>
> Signed-off-by: Michael Walle <michael@walle.cc>

Sorry for not getting to review this earlier.

The subject makes it sound to me as if a "features" field were being
moved from CPULM32State to LM32CPU, which would be great, as done or
proposed elsewhere.
However, instead it is adding a pointer field to LM32CPU to the
definition the class was originally created from IIUC. I would rather
access those fields through LM32CPUClass then (an existing pointer in
the object instance) - but since xtensa is still doing the same and this
not being functionally wrong, no objection to the pull, just a note that
we should revisit it.

Regards,
Andreas

--=20
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=C3=BCrnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imend=C3=B6rffer; HRB 16746 AG N=C3=BC=
rnberg