From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33226) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gLr1e-00052a-VI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 11 Nov 2018 09:47:47 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gLr1c-0004SA-U4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 11 Nov 2018 09:47:46 -0500 Received: from mail-ot1-x342.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::342]:33987) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gLr1b-0004Ps-0w for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 11 Nov 2018 09:47:44 -0500 Received: by mail-ot1-x342.google.com with SMTP id t5so5789724otk.1 for ; Sun, 11 Nov 2018 06:47:41 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20181109152119.9242-8-alex.bennee@linaro.org> References: <20181109152119.9242-1-alex.bennee@linaro.org> <20181109152119.9242-8-alex.bennee@linaro.org> From: Peter Maydell Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2018 14:47:20 +0000 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 7/7] arm: fix aa64_generate_debug_exceptions to work with EL2 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?UTF-8?B?QWxleCBCZW5uw6ll?= Cc: QEMU Developers , qemu-arm On 9 November 2018 at 15:21, Alex Benn=C3=A9e wrot= e: > The test was incomplete and incorrectly caused debug exceptions to be > generated when returning to EL2 after a failed attempt to single-step > an EL1 instruction. Fix this while cleaning up the function a little. > @@ -2833,9 +2845,6 @@ static inline bool aa32_generate_debug_exceptions(C= PUARMState *env) > * since the pseudocode has it at all callsites except for the one in > * CheckSoftwareStep(), where it is elided because both branches would > * always return the same value. > - * > - * Parts of the pseudocode relating to EL2 and EL3 are omitted because w= e > - * don't yet implement those exception levels or their associated trap b= its. > */ In hindsight I regret not standardizing on a greppable tag for marking these kinds of "we don't do X because we don't implement feature Y" comments... thanks -- PMM