> On May 19, 2015, 5:26 p.m., Alexandru Dutu wrote: > > src/cpu/kvm/vm.hh, line 146 > > <http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2760/diff/1/?file=44903#file44903line146> > > > > Would it be useful/cleaner to specialize this class for x86 and move > > CPUIDVector, MSRIndexVector and getSupportedCPUID into the derived class?
Yes, definitely. That's something I'd like to do at some point (I have started a couple of times, but never ended up with a solution I liked). Would you be OK with me leaving that for a later patch? - Andreas ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2760/#review6330 ----------------------------------------------------------- On May 7, 2015, 11:55 a.m., Andreas Sandberg wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2760/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated May 7, 2015, 11:55 a.m.) > > > Review request for Default. > > > Repository: gem5 > > > Description > ------- > > Changeset 10837:40beaa8357a6 > --------------------------- > kvm, x86: Guard x86-specific APIs in KvmVM > > Protect x86-specific APIs in KvmVM with compile-time guards to avoid > breaking ARM builds. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/cpu/kvm/vm.hh fbdaa08aaa42 > src/cpu/kvm/vm.cc fbdaa08aaa42 > > Diff: http://reviews.gem5.org/r/2760/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > ARM regressions pass. All backends build. Tested building with KVM support on > x86 and ARMv8. > > > Thanks, > > Andreas Sandberg > > _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list gem5-dev@gem5.org http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
