https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
Florian Weimer changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||fwei...@redhat.com
--
You are receiving this
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
Julian Seward changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|CONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
--- Comment #17 from ahashmi ---
> One tiny nit .. please #undef get_cpu_ftr and get_ftr just before the
> closing brace of the fn that defines them.
Good spot! Fixed in latest patch.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
ahashmi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #133750|0 |1
is obsolete||
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
--- Comment #15 from Peter Maydell ---
The closest thing to single-source-of-truth is the architectural ID registers,
which these days a Linux kernel will make available to userspace via
trap-and-emulate and which presumably Valgrind does or should
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
--- Comment #14 from Julian Seward ---
Thank you all for the high quality discussion and analysis. This looks
fine to me; please land.
One tiny nit .. please #undef get_cpu_ftr and get_ftr just before the
closing brace of the fn that defines them.
I
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
--- Comment #13 from ahashmi ---
> So it seems to me we also need a way to filter the attribute/feature
> registers to only advertise those armv8 instructions we actually implement.
> That is what other arches do too (see for example the
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
--- Comment #12 from Mark Wielaard ---
(In reply to ahashmi from comment #11)
> > Since programs can also check features through the attribute/feature
> > registers, do we also need to filter those when inspected by the guest code?
> Hmm...I don't see
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
--- Comment #11 from ahashmi ---
> I know too little about arm64 to know whether or not we should care about
> these.
The current approach assumes that all base v8 h/w has the features you list.
I've not seen any base v8 h/w which is different from
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
Mark Wielaard changed:
What|Removed |Added
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Status|REPORTED
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
--- Comment #9 from ahashmi ---
> It's true that if you are v8.2 or better then DC CVAP is present, but this
> does not mean the converse (that if DC CVAP is present then you are v8.2). It
> is valid for a v8.1 implementation to provide this feature.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
ahashmi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #133666|0 |1
is obsolete||
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
--- Comment #7 from Peter Maydell ---
Your logic attempting to identify v8.1, v8.2, etc isn't right. For instance:
+ /* Must be at least v8.2 if DC CVAP instruction available. */
+ if (have_dpbcvap)
+SET_VEX_ARM64_ARCHLEVEL(vai.hwcaps,
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
--- Comment #6 from ahashmi ---
Thanks for reviewing/testing Mark Wielaard and Peter Maydell.
> There are two machines this seems to work correctly on:
> Arch and hwcaps: ARM64, LittleEndian, v8.1-rdm-atomics
> Arch and hwcaps: ARM64, LittleEndian,
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
ahashmi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #133310|0 |1
is obsolete||
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
Peter Maydell changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||peter.mayd...@linaro.org
--- Comment #4 from
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
--- Comment #3 from Mark Wielaard ---
There are two machines this seems to work correctly on:
Arch and hwcaps: ARM64, LittleEndian, v8.1-rdm-atomics
Arch and hwcaps: ARM64, LittleEndian, v8.2-dpcvap-rdm-atomics-fp16-vfp16
But one where I get Arch and
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
ahashmi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jsew...@acm.org
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
ahashmi changed:
What|Removed |Added
See Also||https://bugs.kde.org/show_b
|
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
Mark Wielaard changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||m...@klomp.org
--
You are receiving this mail
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
ahashmi changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||assad.has...@linaro.org
--- Comment #2 from ahashmi
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
ahashmi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|414270 |
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
Julian Seward changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||414270
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
--- Comment #1 from ahashmi ---
See also comments in https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=369509 about
h/w capabilities detection when deciding how to implement.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=414268
ahashmi changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|jsew...@acm.org |assad.has...@linaro.org
--
You are receiving this
25 matches
Mail list logo
