Re: [PATCH v2 14/14] target/arm: Implement gdbstub m-profile systemreg and secext

2023-02-21 Thread Richard Henderson
On 2/21/23 07:25, Peter Maydell wrote: You also want to enforce the RES0 bits on registers like PSPLIM, MSPLIM, FAULTMASK, PSP, MSP, if you're going to implement writes. Effectively you really end up wanting to get helper_v7m_msr to do the work for you. Ho hum. I should have known it was more

Re: [PATCH v2 14/14] target/arm: Implement gdbstub m-profile systemreg and secext

2023-02-21 Thread Peter Maydell
On Tue, 21 Feb 2023 at 02:21, Richard Henderson wrote: > > The upstream gdb xml only implements {MSP,PSP}{,_NS,S}, but > go ahead and implement the other system registers as well. > > Since there is significant overlap between the two, implement > them with common code. The only exception is the

Re: [PATCH v2 14/14] target/arm: Implement gdbstub m-profile systemreg and secext

2023-02-20 Thread Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
On 21/2/23 03:19, Richard Henderson wrote: The upstream gdb xml only implements {MSP,PSP}{,_NS,S}, but go ahead and implement the other system registers as well. Since there is significant overlap between the two, implement them with common code. The only exception is the systemreg view of CONT

[PATCH v2 14/14] target/arm: Implement gdbstub m-profile systemreg and secext

2023-02-20 Thread Richard Henderson
The upstream gdb xml only implements {MSP,PSP}{,_NS,S}, but go ahead and implement the other system registers as well. Since there is significant overlap between the two, implement them with common code. The only exception is the systemreg view of CONTROL, which merges the banked bits as per MRS.