-
Alexander Graf authored
There is no reason to call the hvf specific hvf_cpu_synchronize_state() when we can just use the generic cpu_synchronize_state() instead. This allows us to have less dependency on internal function definitions and allows us to make hvf_cpu_synchronize_state() static. Signed-off-by:
Alexander Graf <agraf@csgraf.de>
Reviewed-by:
Sergio Lopez <slp@redhat.com>
Message-id: 20210519202253.76782-9-agraf@csgraf.de
Reviewed-by:
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by:
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>Alexander Graf authoredThere is no reason to call the hvf specific hvf_cpu_synchronize_state() when we can just use the generic cpu_synchronize_state() instead. This allows us to have less dependency on internal function definitions and allows us to make hvf_cpu_synchronize_state() static. Signed-off-by:
Alexander Graf <agraf@csgraf.de>
Reviewed-by:
Sergio Lopez <slp@redhat.com>
Message-id: 20210519202253.76782-9-agraf@csgraf.de
Reviewed-by:
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by:
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Loading