On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 07:20:34 PDT (-0700), Peter Maydell wrote:
On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 at 15:17, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote:
I think it's simplest if all series (RISC-V, remove unassigned_access,
this one) go through the RISC-V tree.
I don't inherently object but IME the risc-v tree tends to move
comparatively slowly. The initial risc-v conversion patchset
should definitely go via the risc-v tree, anyway.
We still don't have the riscv_cpu_unassigned_access() removal patches in, which
IIRC got blocked on review but I can no longer dig out of my inbox. IIRC the
patches Alistair sent were still "From: Palmer", which means I can't review
them.
I'm fine taking this on top of those, but it looks like there's still some
debate about the patch itself. I don't see a v2.
