From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54298) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5gyT-0001CQ-QW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 17:03:54 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5gyO-00026j-Q7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 17:03:49 -0400 Received: from mail-la0-x22c.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c03::22c]:36172) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5gyO-00026Z-Gs for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 17:03:44 -0400 Received: by lacny3 with SMTP id ny3so62174021lac.3 for ; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 14:03:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5583322E.8050802@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 00:03:42 +0300 From: Sergey Fedorov MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1434554713-10220-1-git-send-email-serge.fdrv@gmail.com> <558330D7.7000006@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] target-arm: Do not reset sysregs marked as ALIAS List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: QEMU Developers On 19.06.2015 00:01, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 18 June 2015 at 21:57, Sergey Fedorov wrote: >> On 18.06.2015 23:46, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> On 17 June 2015 at 16:25, Sergey Fedorov wrote: >>>> cp_reg_reset() is called from g_hash_table_foreach() which does not >>>> define a specific ordering of the hash table iteration. Thus doing reset >>>> for registers marked as ALIAS would give an ambiguous result when >>>> resetvalue is different for original and alias resisters. >>> Was this actually the case for any of our registers? ie, is this >>> patch fixing a bug, or just cleaning up a potential cause of >>> confusion? >> Peter, I discovered such a confusing behavior for PMCR register and >> decided to sort this out. > Ah yes, nice catch. I'll fix up the commit message. > > -- PMM Thanks!