From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MALUP-0003Ku-2F for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 30 May 2009 06:08:33 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MALUL-0003J3-5U for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 30 May 2009 06:08:31 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=44180 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MALUK-0003Io-Ue for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 30 May 2009 06:08:29 -0400 Received: from flounder.pepperfish.net ([87.237.62.181]:43369) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MALUK-0003D9-DE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 30 May 2009 06:08:28 -0400 Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 11:08:24 +0100 From: Vincent Sanders Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/1] Update ARM emulation to be version 4t by default Message-ID: <20090530100824.GF4784@derik> References: <1243603405-12989-1-git-send-email-vince@simtec.co.uk> <1243603405-12989-2-git-send-email-vince@simtec.co.uk> <200905292259.50068.paul@codesourcery.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200905292259.50068.paul@codesourcery.com> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: Paul Brook On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 10:59:49PM +0100, Paul Brook wrote: > On Friday 29 May 2009, Vincent Sanders wrote: > > Update ARM emulation to be version 4t by default and add v5 as a > > feature. Implementation is very similar to the way the v6 features are > > presented. > > You really need to distinguish between v5t and v5te. > This was intended to be a minimum change alteration. The current implementation does not make this distinction and I dont feel it is my place to alter core semantics in this way. I am unaware of the specifics of these differences as the ARM ARM is unrevealing on the subject. It tends to imply there is ARMv4t and ARMv5te. If you feel the need to add this distinction please feel free and I will rebase my patches upon that work. > You've also missed the different load behavior, which is probably the most > important difference. > Please can you provide a reference to what you mean by this? I thought I had provided all the relevant sections. If I have missed something please can you spell it out (preferably by reference to the ARM ARM) as I do not have the ARM ARM commited to memory and lack your insigt on this issue. Please can you confirm that there is nothing erroneous about this patch or approach, just that it is missing some corner cases with respect to loading into the program counter. I would also repeat my previous query asking if I am wasting my time? You appear to go silent on this whenever I ask you directly. No doubt I will bump into you again during the forthcoming months and can ask you face to face but I would prefer if your comments were on record. -- Regards Vincent http://www.kyllikki.org/