On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 5:29 AM Atish Patra wrote:
>
> Currently, if a counter monitoring cycle/instret is stopped via
> mcountinhibit we just update the state while the value is saved
> during the next read. This is not accurate as the read may happen
> many cycles after the counter is stopped. I
On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 01:26:56PM GMT, Atish Kumar Patra wrote:
> On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 5:39 AM Andrew Jones wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 03:00:45PM GMT, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On 4/29/24 16:28, Atish Patra wrote:
> > > > Currently, if a counter monitoring cyc
On Thu, May 2, 2024 at 5:39 AM Andrew Jones wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 03:00:45PM GMT, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 4/29/24 16:28, Atish Patra wrote:
> > > Currently, if a counter monitoring cycle/instret is stopped via
> > > mcountinhibit we just update the state while th
On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 03:00:45PM GMT, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
>
>
> On 4/29/24 16:28, Atish Patra wrote:
> > Currently, if a counter monitoring cycle/instret is stopped via
> > mcountinhibit we just update the state while the value is saved
> > during the next read. This is not accurate
On 4/29/24 16:28, Atish Patra wrote:
Currently, if a counter monitoring cycle/instret is stopped via
mcountinhibit we just update the state while the value is saved
during the next read. This is not accurate as the read may happen
many cycles after the counter is stopped. Ideally, the read sho
Currently, if a counter monitoring cycle/instret is stopped via
mcountinhibit we just update the state while the value is saved
during the next read. This is not accurate as the read may happen
many cycles after the counter is stopped. Ideally, the read should
return the value saved when the counte
