Re: [PULL 04/23] include/exec: Split out exec/cpu-interrupt.h

[Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>]

On 4/2/25 13:13, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 2/4/25 20:46, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> On 4/2/25 03:17, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>>> Hi Richard,
>>>
>>> On 8/3/25 23:58, Richard Henderson wrote:
>>>> Some of these bits are actually common to all cpus; while the
>>>> reset have common reservations for target-specific usage.
>>>> While generic code cannot know what the target-specific usage is,
>>>> common code can know what to do with the bits, e.g. single-step.
>>>>
>>>> Tested-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Pierrick Bouvier <pierrick.bouvier@linaro.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>
>>>> ---
>>>>   include/exec/cpu-all.h       | 53 +--------------------------
>>>>   include/exec/cpu-interrupt.h | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>   include/exec/poison.h        | 13 -------
>>>>   3 files changed, 71 insertions(+), 65 deletions(-)
>>>>   create mode 100644 include/exec/cpu-interrupt.h
>>>
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/include/exec/poison.h b/include/exec/poison.h
>>>> index 35721366d7..8ed04b3108 100644
>>>> --- a/include/exec/poison.h
>>>> +++ b/include/exec/poison.h
>>>> @@ -46,19 +46,6 @@
>>>>   #pragma GCC poison TARGET_PHYS_ADDR_SPACE_BITS
>>>> -#pragma GCC poison CPU_INTERRUPT_HARD
>>>> -#pragma GCC poison CPU_INTERRUPT_EXITTB
>>>> -#pragma GCC poison CPU_INTERRUPT_HALT
>>>> -#pragma GCC poison CPU_INTERRUPT_DEBUG
>>>> -#pragma GCC poison CPU_INTERRUPT_TGT_EXT_0
>>>> -#pragma GCC poison CPU_INTERRUPT_TGT_EXT_1
>>>> -#pragma GCC poison CPU_INTERRUPT_TGT_EXT_2
>>>> -#pragma GCC poison CPU_INTERRUPT_TGT_EXT_3
>>>> -#pragma GCC poison CPU_INTERRUPT_TGT_EXT_4
>>>> -#pragma GCC poison CPU_INTERRUPT_TGT_INT_0
>>>> -#pragma GCC poison CPU_INTERRUPT_TGT_INT_1
>>>> -#pragma GCC poison CPU_INTERRUPT_TGT_INT_2
>>>
>>> If I understood correctly yesterday's discussion, these
>>> definitions are internal to target/ and shouldn't be used
>>> by hw/ at all. If this is right, then we need to keep them
>>> poisoned for hw/ code.
>>
>> No.  They are used by generic code to mask CPU_INTERRUPT_TGT_EXT_* during single- 
>> stepping.  We don't know what they mean, but they're all external interrupts.
> 
> I'm wondering about CPU_INTERRUPT_HARD ... CPU_INTERRUPT_DEBUG.

HARD is probably akin to TGT_EXT_n, but EXITTB, HALT and DEBUG are completely generic.


r~