On Thu, 2018-11-22 at 15:44 +1100, David Gibson wrote: > > Sorry, didn't think of this in my first reply. > > 1) Does the hardware ever actually write back to the EAS? I know it > does for the END, but it's not clear why it would need to for the > EAS. If not, we don't need the setter.
Nope, though the PAPR model will via hcalls > > 2) The signatures are a bit odd here. For the setter, a value would > make sense than a (XiveEAS *), since it's just a word. For the getter > you could return the EAS value directly rather than using a pointer - > there's already a valid bit in the EAS so you can construct a value > with that cleared if the lisn is out of bounds.
