On 23 July 2013 03:43, Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de wrote:
v2 improves internal vs. public header separation for GIC.
As before, no feedback was received to address PMM's QOM concerns,
so this is what we have as design patterns for the moment.
I had a thought about this. Suppose we have our
On 23 July 2013 20:15, Peter Maydell peter.mayd...@linaro.org wrote:
On 23 July 2013 03:43, Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de wrote:
v2 improves internal vs. public header separation for GIC.
As before, no feedback was received to address PMM's QOM concerns,
so this is what we have as design
Am 23.07.2013 um 23:16 schrieb Peter Maydell peter.mayd...@linaro.org:
On 23 July 2013 20:15, Peter Maydell peter.mayd...@linaro.org wrote:
On 23 July 2013 03:43, Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de wrote:
v2 improves internal vs. public header separation for GIC.
As before, no feedback was
On 23 July 2013 22:36, Alexander Graf ag...@suse.de wrote:
Am 23.07.2013 um 23:16 schrieb Peter Maydell peter.mayd...@linaro.org:
On 23 July 2013 20:15, Peter Maydell peter.mayd...@linaro.org wrote:
I had a thought about this. Suppose we have our class header
files do something like this:
On 23.07.2013, at 23:52, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 23 July 2013 22:36, Alexander Graf ag...@suse.de wrote:
Am 23.07.2013 um 23:16 schrieb Peter Maydell peter.mayd...@linaro.org:
On 23 July 2013 20:15, Peter Maydell peter.mayd...@linaro.org wrote:
I had a thought about this. Suppose we
Am 23.07.2013 23:52, schrieb Peter Maydell:
On 23 July 2013 22:36, Alexander Graf ag...@suse.de wrote:
Am 23.07.2013 um 23:16 schrieb Peter Maydell peter.mayd...@linaro.org:
On 23 July 2013 20:15, Peter Maydell peter.mayd...@linaro.org wrote:
[C needing access to full struct definition for
On 23 July 2013 23:08, Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de wrote:
Anyway, before we get lost in a bikeshed discussion, if the
underscore'ization of the type names is to everyone's liking now, I
would very much like to queue the QOM cast patches on qom-next
Which particular patches (whole series?)
Am 23.07.2013 23:55, schrieb Alexander Graf:
On 23.07.2013, at 23:52, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 23 July 2013 22:36, Alexander Graf ag...@suse.de wrote:
Or maybe
struct MyObject {
PUBLIC_FIELDS
__field int publicfield;
PRIVATE_FIELDS
__field int privatefield;
}
I can't see an obvious
Am 24.07.2013 00:10, schrieb Peter Maydell:
On 23 July 2013 23:08, Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de wrote:
Anyway, before we get lost in a bikeshed discussion, if the
underscore'ization of the type names is to everyone's liking now, I
would very much like to queue the QOM cast patches on
On 23 July 2013 23:12, Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de wrote:
I wonder how many public fields do we actually have? Close to zero?
Might there be a way to mark all fields of a struct as private at struct
level, except for those explicitly marked up as public?
No, I don't think this is possible
From: Andreas Färber andreas.faer...@web.de
Hello Peter,
This series fully QOM'ifies A9MPCore so that it can be embedded for Tegra2.
It goes on to do the same for A15MPCore, which had previously been taken as
template for Cortex-A57 by John Rigby.
Separate headers are introduced to only expose
11 matches
Mail list logo
