Re: [Qemu-arm] [PATCH v3 3/7] target-arm: Add the IL flag to syn_data_abort

[Edgar E. Iglesias]

On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 06:06:34PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 29 April 2016 at 13:08, Edgar E. Iglesias <address@hidden> wrote:
> > From: "Edgar E. Iglesias" <address@hidden>
> >
> > Add the IL flag to syn_data_abort(). Since we at the moment
> > never set ISV, the IL flag is always set to one.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Edgar E. Iglesias <address@hidden>
> > ---
> >  target-arm/internals.h | 4 +++-
> >  target-arm/op_helper.c | 6 ++++--
> >  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/target-arm/internals.h b/target-arm/internals.h
> > index 2e70272..34e2688 100644
> > --- a/target-arm/internals.h
> > +++ b/target-arm/internals.h
> > @@ -384,9 +384,11 @@ static inline uint32_t syn_insn_abort(int same_el, int 
> > ea, int s1ptw, int fsc)
> >  }
> >
> >  static inline uint32_t syn_data_abort(int same_el, int ea, int cm, int 
> > s1ptw,
> > -                                      int wnr, int fsc)
> > +                                      int wnr, int fsc,
> > +                                      bool is_16bit)
> >  {
> >      return (EC_DATAABORT << ARM_EL_EC_SHIFT) | (same_el << ARM_EL_EC_SHIFT)
> > +        | (is_16bit ? 0 : ARM_EL_IL)
> >          | (ea << 9) | (cm << 8) | (s1ptw << 7) | (wnr << 6) | fsc;
> >  }
> >
> > diff --git a/target-arm/op_helper.c b/target-arm/op_helper.c
> > index d626ff1..e69c1de 100644
> > --- a/target-arm/op_helper.c
> > +++ b/target-arm/op_helper.c
> > @@ -115,7 +115,8 @@ void tlb_fill(CPUState *cs, target_ulong addr, int 
> > is_write, int mmu_idx,
> >              syn = syn_insn_abort(same_el, 0, fi.s1ptw, syn);
> >              exc = EXCP_PREFETCH_ABORT;
> >          } else {
> > -            syn = syn_data_abort(same_el, 0, 0, fi.s1ptw, is_write == 1, 
> > syn);
> > +            syn = syn_data_abort(same_el, 0, 0, fi.s1ptw, is_write == 1, 
> > syn,
> > +                                 1);
> >              if (is_write == 1 && arm_feature(env, ARM_FEATURE_V6)) {
> >                  fsr |= (1 << 11);
> >              }
> > @@ -161,7 +162,8 @@ void arm_cpu_do_unaligned_access(CPUState *cs, vaddr 
> > vaddr, int is_write,
> >      }
> >
> >      raise_exception(env, EXCP_DATA_ABORT,
> > -                    syn_data_abort(same_el, 0, 0, 0, is_write == 1, 0x21),
> > +                    syn_data_abort(same_el, 0, 0, 0, is_write == 1, 0x21,
> > +                                   1),
> >                      target_el);
> >  }
> 
> Shouldn't this patch be squashed into patch 4? Pretty much everything it
> does is undone by the next patch...

Yes, sounds good, we can do that.

Thanks,
Edgar