On 21/11/2017 16:08, Peter Maydell wrote:
> The memory-internal.h header claims that it is for "obsolete
> exec.c functions" which "will be removed soon". This statement
> was added in 2011, six years ago, but the header is still here.
> (Admittedly none of the prototypes added in commit 67d95c153b
On 21 November 2017 at 15:18, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 21/11/2017 16:08, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> The memory-internal.h header claims that it is for "obsolete
>> exec.c functions" which "will be removed soon". This statement
>> was added in 2011, six years ago, but the header is still here.
>> (Ad
On 21/11/2017 17:04, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>> I'm not sure what you're suggesting. I definitely think the
>> s390 usage is pretty nasty but I guess it would need some
>> rework to get rid of. For everything else, it's nice
>> to have somewhere to share these things. You could argue
>> for s
On 21 November 2017 at 16:04, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 11/21/2017 01:00 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> I'm not sure what you're suggesting. I definitely think the
>> s390 usage is pretty nasty but I guess it would need some
>> rework to get rid of. For everything else, it's nice
>> to have
On 11/21/2017 01:00 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 21 November 2017 at 15:57, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>> On 11/21/2017 12:08 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> The memory-internal.h header claims that it is for "obsolete
>>> exec.c functions" which "will be removed soon". This state
On 21 November 2017 at 15:57, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On 11/21/2017 12:08 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> The memory-internal.h header claims that it is for "obsolete
>> exec.c functions" which "will be removed soon". This statement
>> was added in 2011, six years ago, but the he
Hi Peter,
On 11/21/2017 12:08 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> The memory-internal.h header claims that it is for "obsolete
> exec.c functions" which "will be removed soon". This statement
> was added in 2011, six years ago, but the header is still here.
> (Admittedly none of the prototypes added in com
Hi Peter,
On 11/21/2017 12:08 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> The memory-internal.h header claims that it is for "obsolete
> exec.c functions" which "will be removed soon". This statement
> was added in 2011, six years ago, but the header is still here.
> (Admittedly none of the prototypes added in com
On 21/11/2017 16:08, Peter Maydell wrote:
> The memory-internal.h header claims that it is for "obsolete
> exec.c functions" which "will be removed soon". This statement
> was added in 2011, six years ago, but the header is still here.
> (Admittedly none of the prototypes added in commit 67d95c153b
The memory-internal.h header claims that it is for "obsolete
exec.c functions" which "will be removed soon". This statement
was added in 2011, six years ago, but the header is still here.
(Admittedly none of the prototypes added in commit 67d95c153bef55f6
are still in the header.)
It's convenient
10 matches
Mail list logo
