On Wed, 18 Aug 2021 at 20:26, Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org> wrote: > > Cc: Yoshinori Sato <ys...@users.sourceforge.jp> > Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org> > --- > linux-user/sh4/cpu_loop.c | 8 ++++++++ > target/sh4/cpu.c | 2 +- > target/sh4/op_helper.c | 3 --- > 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/linux-user/sh4/cpu_loop.c b/linux-user/sh4/cpu_loop.c > index 222ed1c670..21d97250a8 100644 > --- a/linux-user/sh4/cpu_loop.c > +++ b/linux-user/sh4/cpu_loop.c > @@ -71,6 +71,14 @@ void cpu_loop(CPUSH4State *env) > info._sifields._sigfault._addr = env->tea; > queue_signal(env, info.si_signo, QEMU_SI_FAULT, &info); > break; > + case 0xe0: > + case 0x100: > + info.si_signo = TARGET_SIGBUS; > + info.si_errno = 0; > + info.si_code = TARGET_BUS_ADRALN; > + info._sifields._sigfault._addr = env->tea; > + queue_signal(env, info.si_signo, QEMU_SI_FAULT, &info); > + break; > case EXCP_ATOMIC: > cpu_exec_step_atomic(cs); > arch_interrupt = false;
Doesn't this have to wait until after the later patches in the series that implement the "actually don't worry about alignment on most sh4 load/stores" ? -- PMM
