On Wed, 2013-02-20 at 16:34 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 20/02/2013 16:18, Laszlo Ersek ha scritto: > >> > I'm beginning to wish I'd just ignored the fact that > >> > we need a properly working "soft" reset to get back from 286 protected > >> > mode to real mode, and wired up the damn PAM reset unconditionally. I'm > >> > not convinced that the protected->real mode transition will work for > >> > anyone anyway. > > I believe currently we must be somewhere "between" soft reset & hard > > reset. I estimate getting closer to a well-emulated hard reset is more > > important than getting closer to a soft one. If you were to extend the > > i440FX reset handler so that it unconditionally resets the PAMs, I'd > > give my Rb. (Take it for what it's worth :)) > > It would actually make sense. The right way to do soft reset has > nothing to do with qemu_system_reset_request().
I've posted that version of the patch, with a suitable comment. Thanks. -- dwmw2
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
