From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KzxYS-0006ay-Ox for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:01:32 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KzxYQ-0006ZO-M3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:01:32 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=36453 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KzxYQ-0006ZH-Ac for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:01:30 -0500 Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.241]:57863) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KzxYP-0003Q9-TQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:01:30 -0500 Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id c38so3371ana.37 for ; Tue, 11 Nov 2008 10:01:29 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:01:28 +0200 From: "Blue Swirl" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] DM9000 network card driver In-Reply-To: <1226402471.14868.5.camel@petitemort> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <1225104596.24465.3.camel@petitemort> <1226313089.10490.3.camel@petitemort> <1226402471.14868.5.camel@petitemort> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: dsilvers@simtec.co.uk, qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 11/11/08, Daniel Silverstone wrote: > On Mon, 2008-11-10 at 18:47 +0200, Blue Swirl wrote: > > > I appreciate that you're all busy, so if the answer is simply "You're on > > > the list, just it'll be a while" then at least I can carry that back to > > > my boss who wants to know how it's going getting these patches to you. > > > Your patch looks very clean. I wouldn't use devices.h for the > > prototype, but instead some board file (for example arm-misc.h). > > > I think I was told to use devices.h quite a while back. It's not > appropriate to put it in arm-misc.h since the device itself has no > specific isolation in ARM stuff. Despite being made to put the HW in the > ARM HW bits of the Makefile. I see. Then devices.h seems correct. I was wondering about NEED_CPU stuff. > > The device is not used by any board, so it's not possible even for the > > maintainer to test the patch. > > > It is used by the board I am trying to get all the patches up-to-snuff > for. Maybe you could add it as an ISA device to PC (pc.c) and see if it works? > > As there is a reset function already, it should not be too difficult > > to register that for system_reset use. > > > Can you explain what you mean by that? Just add a line like qemu_register_reset(dm9000_hard_reset, state); to dm9000_init(). Then if the machine gets reset by monitor command "system_reset" or a hardware device, the reset function will be called to make the device state predictable like on a real machine.