On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 8:32 AM, wrote:
[...]
>>
>> Shouldn't writes to FPEXC from gdb be protected in the same
>> way? Except for that I agree with your patch.
>
> Please correct me if I'm wrong but it seems to me that the code in
> gdbstub.c never writes anything to the VFP registers, at least
On Oct 25, 2009, at 14:23, ext Laurent Desnogues wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:19 PM, wrote:
>> From: Juha Riihimäki
>>
>> All other bits except for the EN in the VFP FPEXC register are
>> defined
>> as subarchitecture specific and real functionality for any of the
>> other bits has not
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:19 PM, wrote:
> From: Juha Riihimäki
>
> All other bits except for the EN in the VFP FPEXC register are defined
> as subarchitecture specific and real functionality for any of the
> other bits has not been implemented in QEMU. However, current code
> allows modifying al
From: Juha Riihimäki
All other bits except for the EN in the VFP FPEXC register are defined
as subarchitecture specific and real functionality for any of the
other bits has not been implemented in QEMU. However, current code
allows modifying all bits in the VFP FPEXC register leading to
problems
