Hi; I've just noticed that although TYPE_CPU is a subclass of
TYPE_DEVICE, it seems to implement its own reset method
('reset' field in CPUClass struct) rather than just using the
DeviceClass's 'reset'.Is there a reason for doing this, or is it just historical legacy from TYPE_CPU originally not being a subclass of TYPE_DEVICE? I ask because I'd like to be able to use 3-phase reset in the Arm CPU, and I'm wondering whether it would be better to make TYPE_CPU just use Device's reset system, or to treat TYPE_CPU as its own base class and implement Resettable there. The former seems more straightforward, unless I'm missing something that means we really do need to have the reset method be different. thanks -- PMM
