On 3/19/24 07:03, Peter Maydell wrote:
On Thu, 29 Feb 2024 at 23:02, Richard Henderson
<richard.hender...@linaro.org> wrote:
On 2/29/24 03:10, Jinjie Ruan via wrote:
+ bool new_state = ((env->cp15.hcr_el2 & HCR_VI) &&
+ (env->cp15.hcrx_el2 & HCRX_VINMI)) ||
+ ((env->cp15.hcr_el2 & HCR_VF) &&
+ (env->cp15.hcrx_el2 & HCRX_VFNMI)) ||
+ (env->irq_line_state & CPU_INTERRUPT_VNMI);
Because the GIC cannot signal an FIQ with superpriority, I think you should not
include VF
&& VFNMI in CPU_INTERRUPT_VNMI.
The GIC can't, but a hypervisor can -- it just sets the
VF and VFNMI bits if it wants one. (Architecturally, the CPU
has a FIQ-with-superpriority, it's only the GIC that doesn't.)
Yes, I know.
The point was not to mix (irq from cpu or gic) with (fiq from cpu) so that we can
correctly determine superpriority later.
Another way would have been to add an fiq-with-superpriority CPU_INTERRUPT bit, but since
there's only one way to get that at present, I thought the extra bit was overkill.
r~
