Peter Maydell <peter.maydell(a)linaro.org> writes:
On 27 July 2012 14:37, Anthony Liguori <aliguori(a)us.ibm.com>
wrote:
> This command attempts to map to the behavior of -cpu ?. Unfortunately, the
> output of this command differs wildly across targets.
I've never really understood why so much of the cpu selection
logic is deferred to target-*...
It will be fixed as part of the QOM conversion.
> To accomodate this, we use a weak symbol to implement a default
version of the
> command that fails with a QERR_NOT_SUPPORTED error code. Targets can then
> override and implement this command if it makes sense for them.
This is a bit of a weak reason (boom boom!) for requiring a platform
specific thing like weak symbols, though, and it's not how we handle
similar existing cases (eg see the configure/makefile logic for
memory_mapping.c vs memory_mapping-stub.c).
I don't think we have a consistent approach today FWIW. I think using
weak symbols is sufficiently compelling that it will become consistent.
If having separate configure/make stuff for each of these things
sounds a bit heavyweight, we could just have a target-stubs.c which
#includes cpu.h and has a lot of
#ifndef TARGET_QUERY_CPUDEFS
[stub version]
#endif
#ifndef TARGET_GET_MEMORY_MAPPING
[stub version]
#endif
This is pretty hideous.
FWIW, weak symbols are supported on OS X as of 10.2.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
etc.
-- PMM