On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 03:24:31PM +0200, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> On 6/4/20 8:27 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > On 28/05/20 21:37, Roman Bolshakov wrote:
> >> There's no similar field in CPUX86State, but it's needed for MMIO traps.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Roman Bolshakov
> >> ---
> >> target/i386
On 6/4/20 8:27 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 28/05/20 21:37, Roman Bolshakov wrote:
>> There's no similar field in CPUX86State, but it's needed for MMIO traps.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Roman Bolshakov
>> ---
>> target/i386/cpu.h | 1 +
>> target/i386/hvf/hvf.c | 5 +
>> target/i386/
On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 08:27:37PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 28/05/20 21:37, Roman Bolshakov wrote:
> > There's no similar field in CPUX86State, but it's needed for MMIO traps.
> >
>
> It should be possible to get rid of the buffer altogether, but it's ok
> to do it separately.
>
Hi Paol
On 28/05/20 21:37, Roman Bolshakov wrote:
> There's no similar field in CPUX86State, but it's needed for MMIO traps.
>
> Signed-off-by: Roman Bolshakov
> ---
> target/i386/cpu.h | 1 +
> target/i386/hvf/hvf.c | 5 +
> target/i386/hvf/x86.h | 1 -
> target/i386/hvf/x86_emu.
There's no similar field in CPUX86State, but it's needed for MMIO traps.
Signed-off-by: Roman Bolshakov
---
target/i386/cpu.h | 1 +
target/i386/hvf/hvf.c | 5 +
target/i386/hvf/x86.h | 1 -
target/i386/hvf/x86_emu.c | 12 ++--
4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 7
