On 9/15/18 6:32 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: > In the current scheme of doing things I'd look for whether > we could say that some more generic thing implied SWP > rather than setting it in a lot of initfns (eg v5-but-not-v7VE?), > but maybe the later patches make that a bad approach > (haven't looked at the meat of this series).
Perhaps. But indeed this goes back to the main question posed in the cover letter. > We want to arrange to have SWP work anyway on linux-user, > I think, since the kernel will typically trap-and-emulate > it assuming it was built with CONFIG_SWP_EMULATE. (I don't > know if those kernels will advertise swp in the hwcaps, > but I guess not.) Ah, I did not know about SWP_EMULATE. It appears to be specific to armv7+ (though we don't support the pre-v4 cpus for which it might otherwise be relevant). It does appear that HWCAP_SWP is advertised anyway: mm/proc-v7.S: .long HWCAP_SWP | HWCAP_HALF | HWCAP_THUMB | HWCAP_FAST_MULT r~
