On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 03:43:48PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 11 September 2015 at 15:40, Edgar E. Iglesias > <edgar.igles...@xilinx.com> wrote: > > In the interest avoiding duplication, do you think the following makes > > sense for regs with the el3_aa32ns_aa64any access checks? > > > > 1. Use STATE_BOTH for "low-activity" registers (e.g the EL3 view when EL2 > > does not exist). > > 2. Use STATE_BOTH for regs that anyway have a read/write function > > 3. Split AA64 and AA32 reg entries for regs without read/write helper call > > for spead (e.g VTCR_EL2). > > Sounds plausible. >
OK, thanks!
