On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 01:54, Richard Henderson
<richard.hender...@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> Cc: Edgar E. Iglesias <edgar.igles...@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org>
> ---
> target/microblaze/cpu.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/target/microblaze/cpu.c b/target/microblaze/cpu.c
> index 72d8f2a0da..cbec062ed7 100644
> --- a/target/microblaze/cpu.c
> +++ b/target/microblaze/cpu.c
> @@ -367,11 +367,11 @@ static const struct TCGCPUOps mb_tcg_ops = {
> .synchronize_from_tb = mb_cpu_synchronize_from_tb,
> .cpu_exec_interrupt = mb_cpu_exec_interrupt,
> .tlb_fill = mb_cpu_tlb_fill,
> + .do_unaligned_access = mb_cpu_do_unaligned_access,
>
> #ifndef CONFIG_USER_ONLY
> .do_interrupt = mb_cpu_do_interrupt,
> .do_transaction_failed = mb_cpu_transaction_failed,
> - .do_unaligned_access = mb_cpu_do_unaligned_access,
> #endif /* !CONFIG_USER_ONLY */
> };
If I'm reading the kernel sources correctly, for Microblaze it always
fixes up unaligned accesses, so for our linux-user code we want
"ignore unaligned access errors" rather than reporting them up
to cpu-loop.c, I think ?
-- PMM
