| Message ID | 1566917919-25381-16-git-send-email-bmeng.cn@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | riscv: sifive_u: Improve the emulation fidelity of sifive_u machine | expand |
On Tue, Aug 27, 2019 at 8:12 AM Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com> wrote: > > At present each hart's hartid in a RISC-V hart array is assigned > the same value of its index in the hart array. But for a system > that has multiple hart arrays, this is not the case any more. > > Add a new "hartid-base" property so that hartid number can be > assigned based on the property value. > > Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com> > > --- > > Changes in v6: > - use s->hartid_base directly, instead of an extra variable > > Changes in v5: None > Changes in v4: > - new patch to add a "hartid-base" property to RISC-V hart array > > Changes in v3: None > Changes in v2: None > > hw/riscv/riscv_hart.c | 7 ++++--- > include/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.h | 1 + > 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.c b/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.c > index 9deef869..7cfc835 100644 > --- a/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.c > +++ b/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.c > @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ > > static Property riscv_harts_props[] = { > DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("num-harts", RISCVHartArrayState, num_harts, 1), > + DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("hartid-base", RISCVHartArrayState, hartid_base, 0), > DEFINE_PROP_STRING("cpu-type", RISCVHartArrayState, cpu_type), > DEFINE_PROP_END_OF_LIST(), > }; > @@ -37,7 +38,7 @@ static void riscv_harts_cpu_reset(void *opaque) > cpu_reset(CPU(cpu)); > } > > -static void riscv_hart_realize(RISCVHartArrayState *s, int idx, > +static void riscv_hart_realize(RISCVHartArrayState *s, int idx, uint32_t hartid, > char *cpu_type, Error **errp) > { > Error *err = NULL; > @@ -45,7 +46,7 @@ static void riscv_hart_realize(RISCVHartArrayState *s, int idx, > object_initialize_child(OBJECT(s), "harts[*]", &s->harts[idx], > sizeof(RISCVCPU), cpu_type, > &error_abort, NULL); > - s->harts[idx].env.mhartid = idx; > + s->harts[idx].env.mhartid = hartid; Couldn't this just be `s->hartid_base + idx`? Alistair > qemu_register_reset(riscv_harts_cpu_reset, &s->harts[idx]); > object_property_set_bool(OBJECT(&s->harts[idx]), true, > "realized", &err); > @@ -63,7 +64,7 @@ static void riscv_harts_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) > s->harts = g_new0(RISCVCPU, s->num_harts); > > for (n = 0; n < s->num_harts; n++) { > - riscv_hart_realize(s, n, s->cpu_type, errp); > + riscv_hart_realize(s, n, s->hartid_base + n, s->cpu_type, errp); > } > } > > diff --git a/include/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.h b/include/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.h > index 0671d88..1984e30 100644 > --- a/include/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.h > +++ b/include/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.h > @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ typedef struct RISCVHartArrayState { > > /*< public >*/ > uint32_t num_harts; > + uint32_t hartid_base; > char *cpu_type; > RISCVCPU *harts; > } RISCVHartArrayState; > -- > 2.7.4 > >
diff --git a/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.c b/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.c index 9deef869..7cfc835 100644 --- a/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.c +++ b/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.c @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ static Property riscv_harts_props[] = { DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("num-harts", RISCVHartArrayState, num_harts, 1), + DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("hartid-base", RISCVHartArrayState, hartid_base, 0), DEFINE_PROP_STRING("cpu-type", RISCVHartArrayState, cpu_type), DEFINE_PROP_END_OF_LIST(), }; @@ -37,7 +38,7 @@ static void riscv_harts_cpu_reset(void *opaque) cpu_reset(CPU(cpu)); } -static void riscv_hart_realize(RISCVHartArrayState *s, int idx, +static void riscv_hart_realize(RISCVHartArrayState *s, int idx, uint32_t hartid, char *cpu_type, Error **errp) { Error *err = NULL; @@ -45,7 +46,7 @@ static void riscv_hart_realize(RISCVHartArrayState *s, int idx, object_initialize_child(OBJECT(s), "harts[*]", &s->harts[idx], sizeof(RISCVCPU), cpu_type, &error_abort, NULL); - s->harts[idx].env.mhartid = idx; + s->harts[idx].env.mhartid = hartid; qemu_register_reset(riscv_harts_cpu_reset, &s->harts[idx]); object_property_set_bool(OBJECT(&s->harts[idx]), true, "realized", &err); @@ -63,7 +64,7 @@ static void riscv_harts_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp) s->harts = g_new0(RISCVCPU, s->num_harts); for (n = 0; n < s->num_harts; n++) { - riscv_hart_realize(s, n, s->cpu_type, errp); + riscv_hart_realize(s, n, s->hartid_base + n, s->cpu_type, errp); } } diff --git a/include/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.h b/include/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.h index 0671d88..1984e30 100644 --- a/include/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.h +++ b/include/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.h @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ typedef struct RISCVHartArrayState { /*< public >*/ uint32_t num_harts; + uint32_t hartid_base; char *cpu_type; RISCVCPU *harts; } RISCVHartArrayState;
At present each hart's hartid in a RISC-V hart array is assigned the same value of its index in the hart array. But for a system that has multiple hart arrays, this is not the case any more. Add a new "hartid-base" property so that hartid number can be assigned based on the property value. Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@gmail.com> --- Changes in v6: - use s->hartid_base directly, instead of an extra variable Changes in v5: None Changes in v4: - new patch to add a "hartid-base" property to RISC-V hart array Changes in v3: None Changes in v2: None hw/riscv/riscv_hart.c | 7 ++++--- include/hw/riscv/riscv_hart.h | 1 + 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)