From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1M8v6g-0005A1-Iy
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 May 2009 07:46:10 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1M8v6f-00059E-IX
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 May 2009 07:46:09 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=45809 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M8v6e-00058m-GY
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 May 2009 07:46:08 -0400
Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.159]:62937)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <laurent.desnogues@gmail.com>) id 1M8v6d-0003wS-Fq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 May 2009 07:46:08 -0400
Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l27so727569fgb.8
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 26 May 2009 04:46:06 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20090526112915.GA3224@shareable.org>
References: <20090423171503.GC4629@derik>
	<200904301708.01385.paul@codesourcery.com>
	<20090523165033.GC8037@derik>
	<200905241931.19368.paul@codesourcery.com>
	<20090526093944.GB4784@derik>
	<761ea48b0905260242v4290a835rd8b958c7544e667c@mail.gmail.com>
	<20090526095652.GA32352@shareable.org>
	<761ea48b0905260308m5ba590cbl31781a20bd3d001f@mail.gmail.com>
	<20090526112915.GA3224@shareable.org>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2009 13:46:06 +0200
Message-ID: <761ea48b0905260446n20fbc791ofb17404f08880e7b@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/16] ARM Add ARM 920T identifiers
From: Laurent Desnogues <laurent.desnogues@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Cc: Vincent Sanders <vince@kyllikki.org>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org> wrote:
> Laurent Desnogues wrote:
[...]
>> It shouldn't. =A0I was thinking about how most people are misusing their
>> toolchain and think that if QEMU runs correctly some code, it should
>> run on the target. =A0In that particular case, that will fail :-) =A0For=
 instance
>> LDM with PC used as procedure return does not behave the same
>> in v4T and v5 IIRC.
>
> I agree. =A0Especially for testing toolchains and architecture-specific
> code, it would be quite nice :-)
>
> I gather the x86 target is similarly lax with checking some things
> that a real x86 checks.

The existing ARM target is lax too, but quite close.  The main problem
is that the ARM architecture defines what is IMPLEMENTATION
DEFINED and also contains many UNPREDICTABLE behaviors, and
there are programs that rely on both, which basically means that if
one wanted an accurate simulation of all that, the ARM target would
be even more unreadable than it is now :)  Anyway architectural
compliance would be enough and I think it's highly desirable.


Laurent