On Sat, Nov 21, 2020 at 12:24 AM Alistair Francis <alistair23@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On 19/11/2020 7:02 pm, Kito Cheng wrote:
> >> diff --git a/target/riscv/cpu.c b/target/riscv/cpu.c
> >> index 0bbfd7f4574..bc29e118c6d 100644
> >> --- a/target/riscv/cpu.c
> >> +++ b/target/riscv/cpu.c
> >> @@ -438,6 +438,9 @@ static void riscv_cpu_realize(DeviceState *dev,
> Error **errp)
> >>           if (cpu->cfg.ext_h) {
> >>               target_misa |= RVH;
> >>           }
> >> +        if (cpu->cfg.ext_b) {
> >> +            target_misa |= RVB;
> >> +        }
> >>           if (cpu->cfg.ext_v) {
> >>               target_misa |= RVV;
> >>               if (!is_power_of_2(cpu->cfg.vlen)) {
> >> @@ -515,6 +518,7 @@ static Property riscv_cpu_properties[] = {
> >>       DEFINE_PROP_BOOL("s", RISCVCPU, cfg.ext_s, true),
> >>       DEFINE_PROP_BOOL("u", RISCVCPU, cfg.ext_u, true),
> >>       /* This is experimental so mark with 'x-' */
> >> +    DEFINE_PROP_BOOL("x-b", RISCVCPU, cfg.ext_b, true),
> >
> > I think the default value should be false?
>
> Good catch, I missed that.
>
> Yes it should be false.
>
> Alistair
>

Thanks, I'll fix it in my next patchset.

Frank Chang


>
> >
> >>       DEFINE_PROP_BOOL("x-h", RISCVCPU, cfg.ext_h, false),
> >>       DEFINE_PROP_BOOL("x-v", RISCVCPU, cfg.ext_v, false),
> >>       DEFINE_PROP_BOOL("Counters", RISCVCPU, cfg.ext_counters, true),
> >
>