From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57161C433ED for ; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 10:40:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 905E961159 for ; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 10:40:43 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 905E961159 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:55684 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lUS5a-0004CU-JF for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 06:40:42 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45142) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lUS45-00030y-Hv for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 06:39:10 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:48246) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lUS3y-0006by-ND for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 06:39:06 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0171B007; Thu, 8 Apr 2021 10:39:00 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [RFC v12 17/65] target/arm: tcg: add stubs for some helpers for non-tcg builds To: Richard Henderson , Peter Maydell , =?UTF-8?Q?Philippe_Mathieu-Daud=c3=a9?= , =?UTF-8?Q?Alex_Benn=c3=a9e?= References: <20210326193701.5981-1-cfontana@suse.de> <20210326193701.5981-18-cfontana@suse.de> <20afd643-604c-8b0a-fe02-3e6a08c5f848@linaro.org> From: Claudio Fontana Message-ID: <90f7f2b7-d9cb-d9ab-d285-9dc186981cc2@suse.de> Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 12:39:00 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20afd643-604c-8b0a-fe02-3e6a08c5f848@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=195.135.220.15; envelope-from=cfontana@suse.de; helo=mx2.suse.de X-Spam_score_int: -41 X-Spam_score: -4.2 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Paolo Bonzini , Roman Bolshakov , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Eduardo Habkost Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 3/28/21 6:22 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 3/26/21 1:36 PM, Claudio Fontana wrote: >> +int fp_exception_el(CPUARMState *env, int cur_el) >> +{ >> + return 0; >> +} > > Oh, I'm pretty sure this should be identical with sve_exception_el, where the > fpu may or may not be enabled for a given cpu state (e.g. lazy fpu switching in > the kvm guest kernel). > > Are we really returning constant 0 for kvm before your patch set? > > > r~ > I tried to remember and follow the fp_exception_el in detail, and _maybe_ the assumption here was the same as I had before, ie: KVM arm_hcr_el2_eff() = 0? So as we changed this assumption for arm_hcr_el2_eff(), and ended up taking the whole implementation for KVM too, we might need to do the same for fp_exception_el? Thanks, Claudio