Depends how you're defining 'child pornography.'
Content involving actual minor-aged persons (under 18 typically) engaged in sexual behaviours is for all intents and purposes illegal on this planet.
Content using adults made to look like, or attested to be minors is sometimes illegal (location-specific.)
Content using adults who a reasonable person would believe to be a minor may be illegal (again, location-specific.)
Content NOT using actual people as with the latest computer generated images (as distinct from digital modified real people as with age-retarding visual effects) is sometimes illegal. Legal in the US at least federally, illegal if not mistaken in Canada and the UK.
Content involving actual 'drawn' versions as above.
US Federal Law defining illegal pornographic content below,
"(8) “child pornography” means any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where—
(A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(B) such visual depiction is a digital image, computer image, or computer-generated image that is, or is indistinguishable from, that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or
(C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct.
(11) the term “indistinguishable” used with respect to a depiction, means virtually indistinguishable, in that the depiction is such that an ordinary person viewing the depiction would conclude that the depiction is of an actual minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults."
So where ever it's illegal, it's 'wrong.' At least in that legal sense.
Ethicacy of is another matter. To which I'm of the opinion if it involves actual minors, made by minors, for other minors, whether it gets into the public domain or not it's not unethical as with sexting, or boy/girlfriends making imagery or video for their minor boy/girlfriends.
If it's an adult USING minors for personal or commercial purposes it's unethical.
CGI versions not involving actual human beings are just as ethical as masterwork art or a child's 'doodle' stick figures. Can't draw to save my life, but can draw 2 stick-figures, one half the height of the other and call the shorter one a child, and the other an adult. Is that then 'child pornography?' Of course not. CGI-generated images are the same thing ultimately.