Re: v8.1M cpu emulation and target-arm feature-identification strategy

[Peter Maydell]

On Wed, 5 Aug 2020 at 17:45, Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org> wrote:
> I wouldn't test other feature bits but what stopping us adding:
>
>     struct ARMISARegisters {
>         uint32_t id_isar0;
>         ...
>         uint64_t id_aa64dfr1;
>         /*
>          * The following are synthetic flags for features not exposed to
>          * the directly exposed to the guest but needed by QEMU's
>          * feature detection.
>          */
>         bool v81m_lob;
>     } isar;

Nothing, except we already have a set of synthetic flags, that's
what the ARM_FEATURE_* are...

> That said we still seem to have a number of ARM_FEATURE flags, are we
> hoping they all go away eventually?

I think that they're a mixed bag. Some represent cleanups we
haven't got round to doing yet (eg ARM_FEATURE_NEON, which would
be a fair chunk of work, or ARM_FEATURE_PXN which would be pretty
trivial to change to looking at ID_MMFR0.VMSA >=4). Some are
features that pre-date the ID feature bit scheme and so might
be awkward to convert (eg ARM_FEATURE_XSCALE). One or two
we've already converted and just forgot to take out of the
enum (eg ARM_FEATURE_CRC)...

thanks
-- PMM