From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45620)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <sebastian@macke.de>) id 1YIdAE-0005QT-QC
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 08:05:11 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <sebastian@macke.de>) id 1YIdAA-0004AA-DY
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 08:05:10 -0500
Received: from www11.your-server.de ([213.133.104.11]:45643)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <sebastian@macke.de>) id 1YIdAA-00040t-7J
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 08:05:06 -0500
Message-ID: <54D0C778.8020700@macke.de>
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 14:04:56 +0100
From: Sebastian Macke <sebastian@macke.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1422929995-33807-1-git-send-email-proljc@gmail.com>
	<CAFEAcA_x9yvXVKaqpAXcN7yv1BXBqs_KipKyT0kZDhOtPwpzxg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA_x9yvXVKaqpAXcN7yv1BXBqs_KipKyT0kZDhOtPwpzxg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL 0/2] OpenRISC patch queue for 2.3
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: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, Jia Liu <proljc@gmail.com>
Cc: blue@cmd.nu, QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Anthony Liguori <aliguori@amazon.com>

Hi Peter,

unfortunately you are right.

The correct line is this:

      /* invalidate lock */
-    env->cpu_lock_addr = -1;
+    env->lock_addr = -1;

I am sorry. It was most likely the last line which I added. But I 
forgot, that I disabled the system emulation already.
Therefore my make process didn't complain.
Should I send an updated patch, or can you do a hot-fix?

Sebastian


On 2/3/2015 11:40 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 3 February 2015 at 02:19, Jia Liu <proljc@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Anthony,
>>
>> This is my OpenRISC patch queue for 2.3, it have been well tested, please pull.
> ...it can't have been very well tested, because it doesn't
> compile:
>
> target-openrisc/interrupt.c: In function ‘openrisc_cpu_do_interrupt’:
> target-openrisc/interrupt.c:58:8: error: ‘CPUOpenRISCState’ has no
> member named ‘cpu_lock_addr’
>
> thanks
> -- PMM