Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 02/34] tcg+qom: QOMify core CPU defintions

["Andreas Färber" <afaerber@suse.de>]

Am 11.05.2015 um 12:24 schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
> On 11/05/2015 12:18, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>>> +    int (*cpu_mmu_index)(CPUState *cpu);
>>>> +    void (*cpu_get_tb_cpu_state)(CPUState *cpu,
>>>> +                                 void *pc, /* target_long * */
>>>> +                                 void *cs_base, /* target_long */
>>>> +                                 int *flags);
>>>> +    void (*gen_intermediate_code)(void *env, struct TranslationBlock *tb);
>>>> +    void (*gen_intermediate_code_pc)(void *env, struct TranslationBlock *tb);
>>>> +    void (*restore_state_to_opc)(void *env, struct TranslationBlock *tb,
>>>> +                                 int pc_pos);
>>>> +    void (*tlb_fill)(CPUState *cs, uint64_t addr, int is_write, int mmu_idx,
>>>> +                     uintptr_t retaddr);
>>>>  } CPUClass;
>>>>  
>>>>  #ifdef HOST_WORDS_BIGENDIAN
>> [snip]
>>
>> Paolo had objected to this when I tried it. The counter-suggestion was
>> something about reworking how the cputlb code is built per target -
>> please check the archives.
> 
> Right.  My point was that these functions are not polymorphic.  Each
> call to these should know exactly which function to call.
> 
> cputlb.c, cpu-exec.c and parts of translate-all.c should be the moral
> equivalent of C++ templates.  I wouldn't mind switching to C++, but if
> we want to make them polymorphic we should do it at compile time through
> multiple compilation and/or inclusion from target-*.

I think we got more concrete than that, possibly on IRC only? I believe
#include'ing cputlb.c from some target-* file was one of your proposed
solutions? And splitting some of the inline functions that I was getting
rid of into some new (or existing?) file?

Andreas

-- 
SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Dilip Upmanyu, Graham Norton; HRB
21284 (AG Nürnberg)