From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35706)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <macro@linux-mips.org>) id 1YGmxW-00015b-2J
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 06:08:26 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <macro@linux-mips.org>) id 1YGmxQ-0003NN-Vu
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 06:08:26 -0500
Received: from eddie.linux-mips.org ([148.251.95.138]:59682
	helo=cvs.linux-mips.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <macro@linux-mips.org>) id 1YGmxQ-0003N3-Mh
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 06:08:20 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1]:39914 "EHLO
	localhost.localdomain" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S27009841AbbA2LITD6GPV (ORCPT
	<rfc822;qemu-devel@nongnu.org>); Thu, 29 Jan 2015 12:08:19 +0100
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 11:08:18 +0000 (GMT)
From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@linux-mips.org>
In-Reply-To: <54CA052B.2020106@imgtec.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.11.1501291103280.28301@eddie.linux-mips.org>
References: <1422289059-6849-1-git-send-email-leon.alrae@imgtec.com>
	<alpine.LFD.2.11.1501280055020.28301@eddie.linux-mips.org>
	<54CA052B.2020106@imgtec.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] target-mips: use CP0EnLo_XI instead of
 magic number
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Leon Alrae <leon.alrae@imgtec.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>

On Thu, 29 Jan 2015, Leon Alrae wrote:

> >  And do we want to have CP0C3_LPA set in the few templates that do in the 
> > first place?  AFAICT we don't really implement LPA so this bit will 
> > confuse software.  Of course implementing it would be another option, not 
> > very complicated AFAICS, and if we can track the requirement to update 
> > MFC0 at that time, then the clean-up I mentioned above can be deferred 
> > until then.
> 
> In general I don't think it's a good idea to indicate presence of a
> feature in a CPU config if it isn't implemented at all in QEMU -- as you
> said, it will confuse software. As far as LPA goes I've got already an
> implementation of it (and XPA as well) which I haven't submitted
> upstream yet. I'll make sure it contains the change you suggested.

 Great, I'll leave it to you to sort out then.  Thanks!

  Maciej