Re: [PATCH v10 25/32] cpu: move do_unaligned_access to tcg_ops

[Claudio Fontana]

On 12/10/20 2:14 PM, Claudio Fontana wrote:
> On 12/10/20 2:01 PM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>> On 12/10/20 1:12 PM, Claudio Fontana wrote:
>>> make it consistently SOFTMMU-only.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Claudio Fontana <cfontana@suse.de>
>>> Reviewed-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>>  include/hw/core/cpu.h           | 17 +++--------------
>>>  include/hw/core/tcg-cpu-ops.h   |  7 +++++++
>>>  target/alpha/cpu.c              |  2 +-
>>>  target/arm/cpu.c                |  2 +-
>>>  target/hppa/cpu.c               |  4 +++-
>>>  target/microblaze/cpu.c         |  2 +-
>>>  target/mips/cpu.c               |  3 ++-
>>>  target/nios2/cpu.c              |  2 +-
>>>  target/riscv/cpu.c              |  2 +-
>>>  target/s390x/cpu.c              |  2 +-
>>>  target/sh4/cpu.c                |  2 +-
>>>  target/sparc/cpu.c              |  2 +-
>>>  target/xtensa/cpu.c             |  2 +-
>>>  target/ppc/translate_init.c.inc |  2 +-
>>>  14 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>> ...
>>
>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_SOFTMMU
>>> +#if !defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY) && defined(CONFIG_TCG)
>>>  static inline void cpu_unaligned_access(CPUState *cpu, vaddr addr,
>>>                                          MMUAccessType access_type,
>>>                                          int mmu_idx, uintptr_t retaddr)
>>>  {
>>>      CPUClass *cc = CPU_GET_CLASS(cpu);
>>>  
>>> -    cc->do_unaligned_access(cpu, addr, access_type, mmu_idx, retaddr);
>>> +    cc->tcg_ops.do_unaligned_access(cpu, addr, access_type, mmu_idx, 
>>> retaddr);
>>>  }
>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_TCG
>>>  static inline void cpu_transaction_failed(CPUState *cpu, hwaddr physaddr,
>>>                                            vaddr addr, unsigned size,
>>>                                            MMUAccessType access_type,
>>> @@ -858,10 +850,7 @@ static inline void cpu_transaction_failed(CPUState 
>>> *cpu, hwaddr physaddr,
>>>                                            mmu_idx, attrs, response, 
>>> retaddr);
>>>      }
>>>  }
>>> -#endif /* CONFIG_TCG */
>>> -#endif /* CONFIG_SOFTMMU */
>>> -
>>> -#endif /* NEED_CPU_H */
>>> +#endif /* !CONFIG_USER_ONLY && CONFIG_TCG */
>>>  
>>>  /**
>>>   * cpu_set_pc:
>>> diff --git a/include/hw/core/tcg-cpu-ops.h b/include/hw/core/tcg-cpu-ops.h
>>> index 3cc2733410..bac0165db6 100644
>>> --- a/include/hw/core/tcg-cpu-ops.h
>>> +++ b/include/hw/core/tcg-cpu-ops.h
>>> @@ -50,6 +50,13 @@ typedef struct TcgCpuOperations {
>>>                                    unsigned size, MMUAccessType access_type,
>>>                                    int mmu_idx, MemTxAttrs attrs,
>>>                                    MemTxResult response, uintptr_t retaddr);
>>> +    /**
>>> +     * @do_unaligned_access: Callback for unaligned access handling, if
>>> +     * the target defines #TARGET_ALIGNED_ONLY.
>>> +     */
>>> +    void (*do_unaligned_access)(CPUState *cpu, vaddr addr,
>>> +                                MMUAccessType access_type,
>>> +                                int mmu_idx, uintptr_t retaddr);
>>
>> Similarly to previous patch, don't we want to restrict this
>> to system-mode?
> 
> In theory yes, (and what about exec_interrupt..?)

exec_interrupt: probably not.

> but we need to triple check the targets, because they tend to set these 
> unconditionally.
> 
> Same concern about CONFIG_USER_ONLY vs NEED_CPU_H / CONFIG_SOFTMMU, would use 
> CONFIG_USER_ONLY for consistency with the other targets?
> 
> 
> 
>>
>>>  
>>>      /**
>>>       * @tlb_fill: Handle a softmmu tlb miss or user-only address fault
>>
>