Message ID | cover.1566573576.git.alistair.francis@wdc.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | RISC-V: Hypervisor prep work part 2 | expand |
On Fri, 23 Aug 2019 08:21:06 PDT (-0700), Alistair Francis wrote: > > The first three patches are ones that I have pulled out of my original > Hypervisor series at an attempt to reduce the number of patches in the > series. > > These three patches all make sense without the Hypervisor series so can > be merged seperatley and will reduce the review burden of the next > version of the patches. > > The fource patch is a prep patch for the new v0.4 Hypervisor spec. > > The fifth patch is unreleated to Hypervisor that I'm just slipping in > here because it seems easier then sending it by itself. > > The final two patches are issues I discovered while adding the v0.4 > Hypervisor extension. > > v4: > - Drop MIP change patch > - Add a Floating Point fixup patch > v3: > - Change names of all GP registers > - Add two more patches > v2: > - Small corrections based on feedback > - Remove the CSR permission check patch > > > > Alistair Francis (6): > target/riscv: Don't set write permissions on dirty PTEs > riscv: plic: Remove unused interrupt functions > target/riscv: Create function to test if FP is enabled > target/riscv: Update the Hypervisor CSRs to v0.4 > target/riscv: Fix mstatus dirty mask > target/riscv: Use TB_FLAGS_MSTATUS_FS for floating point > > Atish Patra (1): > target/riscv: Use both register name and ABI name > > hw/riscv/sifive_plic.c | 12 ------------ > include/hw/riscv/sifive_plic.h | 3 --- > target/riscv/cpu.c | 19 ++++++++++-------- > target/riscv/cpu.h | 6 +++++- > target/riscv/cpu_bits.h | 35 +++++++++++++++++----------------- > target/riscv/cpu_helper.c | 16 ++++++++++++---- > target/riscv/csr.c | 22 +++++++++++---------- > 7 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 55 deletions(-) Aside from that PTE patch, I've applied target/riscv: Use both register name and ABI name target/riscv: Fix mstatus dirty mask target/riscv: Use TB_FLAGS_MSTATUS_FS for floating point on top of Bin's patch set, as the rest had made it into for-master. Like we talked about at lunch, I'm not sure the PTE one is actually correct -- it might just be paranoia, though.