On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 10:59:55PM +0800, Alistair Francis wrote: > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 5:15 AM Dylan Jhong <dy...@andestech.com> wrote: > > > > Although the AE350 has not been upstream (preparing for v2), > > the reset vector of the AE350 is known to be at the 2G position, > > so this patch is corrected in advance. > > > > Signed-off-by: Dylan Jhong <dy...@andestech.com> > > Signed-off-by: Ruinland ChuanTzu Tsai <ruinl...@andestech.com> > > --- > > target/riscv/cpu.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/target/riscv/cpu.c b/target/riscv/cpu.c > > index 2a990f6253..0236abf169 100644 > > --- a/target/riscv/cpu.c > > +++ b/target/riscv/cpu.c > > @@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ static void set_feature(CPURISCVState *env, int feature) > > env->features |= (1ULL << feature); > > } > > > > -static void set_resetvec(CPURISCVState *env, int resetvec) > > +static void set_resetvec(CPURISCVState *env, uint64_t resetvec) > > resetvec in env is a target_ulong so this should be as well (instead > of a uint64_t). > > Alistair >
Hi Alistar, Thanks for your comments. Indeed resetvec should use target_ulong instead of uint64_t. But in target/riscv/cpu.h:306, there is also a resetvec in struct RISCVCPU but it is defined as uint64_t. Do you think I should change it to target_ulong together? ref: commit 9b4c9b2b2a50fe4eb90d0ac2d8723b46ecb42511 https://www.mail-archive.com/qemu-devel@nongnu.org/msg730077.html > > { > > #ifndef CONFIG_USER_ONLY > > env->resetvec = resetvec; > > -- > > 2.17.1 > > > >
