On 16 May 2011 18:51, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 16 May 2011 18:29, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> That said given this patch is more or less an extension of an existing
>> code, we may want to apply it anyway.
>
> That is the conclusion I'm hoping to persuade you to, yes :-)
This patch seems to have g
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 06:47:42PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 16 May 2011 18:29, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 05:37:03PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> You can do this by calling GETPC() from the top level helper function
> >> though, right? [OK, we'd need to move the
On 16 May 2011 18:29, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> That said given this patch is more or less an extension of an existing
> code, we may want to apply it anyway.
That is the conclusion I'm hoping to persuade you to, yes :-)
-- PMM
On 16 May 2011 18:29, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 05:37:03PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> You can do this by calling GETPC() from the top level helper function
>> though, right? [OK, we'd need to move the definition out of dyngen-exec.h.]
>
> No we don't need to move it out o
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:59:47AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 14 May 2011 22:32, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 03:32:27PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> I just spoke with Paul on IRC about this. In summary:
> >> * for a helper to cause an exception then it has (a) to m
On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 05:37:03PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 16 May 2011 17:10, Paul Brook wrote:
> >> > I just spoke with Paul on IRC about this. In summary:
> >> > * for a helper to cause an exception then it has (a) to make sure CPU
> >> >
> >> > state (pc, condflags) is sync'd before t
On 16 May 2011 17:10, Paul Brook wrote:
>> > I just spoke with Paul on IRC about this. In summary:
>> > * for a helper to cause an exception then it has (a) to make sure CPU
>> >
>> > state (pc, condflags) is sync'd before the call to the helper and (b)
>> > the helper has to be in a file with ac
> > I just spoke with Paul on IRC about this. In summary:
> > * for a helper to cause an exception then it has (a) to make sure CPU
> >
> > state (pc, condflags) is sync'd before the call to the helper and (b)
> > the helper has to be in a file with access to global env, because it
> > needs to ca
On 14 May 2011 22:32, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 03:32:27PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> I just spoke with Paul on IRC about this. In summary:
>> * for a helper to cause an exception then it has (a) to make sure CPU
>> state (pc, condflags) is sync'd before the call to the
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 01:01:40AM +0300, Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 12:32 AM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 03:32:27PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> On 26 April 2011 11:23, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 11:35:54PM +0100, Peter Maydel
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 12:32 AM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 03:32:27PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 26 April 2011 11:23, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 11:35:54PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> >> On 25 April 2011 23:31, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> >>
On Fri, May 06, 2011 at 03:32:27PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 26 April 2011 11:23, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 11:35:54PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> On 25 April 2011 23:31, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 10:59:52PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote
On 26 April 2011 11:23, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 11:35:54PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 25 April 2011 23:31, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 10:59:52PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> >> On 25 April 2011 22:09, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> >> > Instead
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 11:35:54PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 25 April 2011 23:31, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 10:59:52PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> On 25 April 2011 22:09, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> >> > Instead of having this complex test for all cp15 access, but
On 25 April 2011 23:31, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 10:59:52PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 25 April 2011 22:09, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> > Instead of having this complex test for all cp15 access, but only for
>> > catching a few access to performance registers, wouldn't
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 10:59:52PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 25 April 2011 22:09, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 05:01:48PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>
> >> + tb_flush(env);
> >
> > If you flush all tbs, you also have to ensure that on the translate.c
>
On 25 April 2011 22:09, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 05:01:48PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> + tb_flush(env);
>
> If you flush all tbs, you also have to ensure that on the translate.c
> side, this is the last instruction of the tb. Otherwise, the rest of the
>
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 05:01:48PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> Newer Linux kernels assume the existence of the performance counter
> cp15 registers. Provide a minimal implementation of these registers.
> We support no events. This should be compliant with the ARM ARM,
> except that we don't imple
On Friday 22 April 2011 19:48:09 Peter Maydell wrote:
> Looking at your .rej file it seems to have lost the hardcoded tab
> characters[*] that are in the patch; I suspect something in your mailer
> is turning them back into spaces. Try downloading the patch from
> patchwork instead.
Yep, that worke
On 22 April 2011 08:23, Brad Hards wrote:
> On Friday 22 April 2011 02:01:48 Peter Maydell wrote:
>> Newer Linux kernels assume the existence of the performance counter
>> cp15 registers. Provide a minimal implementation of these registers.
>> We support no events. This should be compliant with th
On Friday 22 April 2011 02:01:48 Peter Maydell wrote:
> Newer Linux kernels assume the existence of the performance counter
> cp15 registers. Provide a minimal implementation of these registers.
> We support no events. This should be compliant with the ARM ARM,
> except that we don't implement the
Newer Linux kernels assume the existence of the performance counter
cp15 registers. Provide a minimal implementation of these registers.
We support no events. This should be compliant with the ARM ARM,
except that we don't implement the cycle counter.
Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell
---
This is the
22 matches
Mail list logo
