Am 15.02.2013 17:45, schrieb Alexander Graf:
>
> On 15.02.2013, at 15:35, Andreas Färber wrote:
>
>> Am 15.02.2013 15:29, schrieb Alexander Graf:
>>>
>>> On 15.02.2013, at 15:25, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>>
Since we still need env for ppc-specific fields, obtain it via the new
env_ptr fie
On 15.02.2013, at 15:35, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Am 15.02.2013 15:29, schrieb Alexander Graf:
>>
>> On 15.02.2013, at 15:25, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>
>>> Since we still need env for ppc-specific fields, obtain it via the new
>>> env_ptr fields to avoid "cpu" name conflicts between CPUState and
Am 15.02.2013 15:29, schrieb Alexander Graf:
>
> On 15.02.2013, at 15:25, Andreas Färber wrote:
>
>> Since we still need env for ppc-specific fields, obtain it via the new
>> env_ptr fields to avoid "cpu" name conflicts between CPUState and
>> PowerPCCPU for now.
>>
>> This fixes a potential issu
On 15.02.2013, at 15:25, Andreas Färber wrote:
> Since we still need env for ppc-specific fields, obtain it via the new
> env_ptr fields to avoid "cpu" name conflicts between CPUState and
> PowerPCCPU for now.
>
> This fixes a potential issue with env being NULL at the end of the loop
> but cpu
Since we still need env for ppc-specific fields, obtain it via the new
env_ptr fields to avoid "cpu" name conflicts between CPUState and
PowerPCCPU for now.
This fixes a potential issue with env being NULL at the end of the loop
but cpu still being a valid pointer corresponding to a previous env.