[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-arm] [PATCH for-4.1] target/arm: Set VFP-related MVFR0 fields

From: Peter Maydell
Subject: Re: [Qemu-arm] [PATCH for-4.1] target/arm: Set VFP-related MVFR0 fields for arm926 and arm1026
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:02:31 +0100

On Thu, 11 Jul 2019 at 14:01, Alex Bennée <address@hidden> wrote:
> Peter Maydell <address@hidden> writes:
> > The ARMv5 architecture didn't specify detailed per-feature ID
> > registers. Now that we're using the MVFR0 register fields to
> > gate the existence of VFP instructions, we need to set up
> > the correct values in the cpu->isar structure so that we still
> > provide an FPU to the guest.
> >
> > This fixes a regression in the arm926 and arm1026 CPUs, which
> > are the only ones that both have VFP and are ARMv5 or earlier.
> > This regression was introduced by the VFP refactoring, and more
> > specifically by commits 1120827fa182f0e76 and 266bd25c485597c,
> > which accidentally disabled VFP short-vector support and
> > double-precision support on these CPUs.
> >
> > Reported-by: Christophe Lyon <address@hidden>
> > Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <address@hidden>
> > Fixes: 1120827fa182f0e
> > Fixes: 266bd25c485597c
> > Fixes: https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1836192
> > ---
> > I've followed the existing approach we used for ISAR1 here
> > of just filling in the fields we care about, rather than trying
> > to set the entire register value.
> Reviewed-by: Alex Bennée <address@hidden>
> Do you think we have caught them all now? If we end up removing the
> other ARM_FEATURE_foo flags in favour of isar tests we shall have to be
> careful not to re-introduce these sort of bugs.

I checked that these were the only two extra ID-reg checks we
added as part of the VFP conversion, at any rate (ignoring
the checks for features the ARMv5 cores don't have).

-- PMM

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]