RE: [PATCH v2 1/3] target-arm: delete ARM_FEATURE_A64FX
> This is confusing because I can't see this feature flag in the mainline
> branch. Have
> you inadvertently based this series from an internal branch?
I'm sorry for the confusion.
My lack of understanding of how to handle v2 patches has led me to create a v2
patch series
based on patches that have not been merged into upstream.
I will repost this so that the implementation can be closed in one patch series.
Best regards.
> -Original Message-
> From: Alex Bennée
> Sent: Friday, July 30, 2021 7:36 PM
> To: Ishii, Shuuichirou/石井 周一郎
> Cc: peter.mayd...@linaro.org; qemu-devel@nongnu.org; qemu-...@nongnu.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] target-arm: delete ARM_FEATURE_A64FX
>
>
> Shuuichirou Ishii writes:
>
> > The ARM_FEATURE_A64FX property was added, but there is no function
> > that uses this property yet, so it will be removed until a function
> > that uses it is added.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shuuichirou Ishii
> > ---
> > target/arm/cpu.h | 1 -
> > target/arm/cpu64.c | 1 -
> > 2 files changed, 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/target/arm/cpu.h b/target/arm/cpu.h index
> > 1b0c7b91ec..9f0a5f84d5 100644
> > --- a/target/arm/cpu.h
> > +++ b/target/arm/cpu.h
> > @@ -2145,7 +2145,6 @@ enum arm_features {
> > ARM_FEATURE_M_SECURITY, /* M profile Security Extension */
> > ARM_FEATURE_M_MAIN, /* M profile Main Extension */
> > ARM_FEATURE_V8_1M, /* M profile extras only in v8.1M and later */
> > -ARM_FEATURE_A64FX, /* Fujitsu A64FX processor HPC extensions
> > support */
>
> This is confusing because I can't see this feature flag in the mainline
> branch. Have
> you inadvertently based this series from an internal branch?
>
> > };
> >
> > static inline int arm_feature(CPUARMState *env, int feature) diff
> > --git a/target/arm/cpu64.c b/target/arm/cpu64.c index
> > a15f9c0c55..dd72300e88 100644
> > --- a/target/arm/cpu64.c
> > +++ b/target/arm/cpu64.c
> > @@ -856,7 +856,6 @@ static void aarch64_a64fx_initfn(Object *obj)
> > ARMCPU *cpu = ARM_CPU(obj);
> >
> > cpu->dtb_compatible = "arm,a64fx";
> > -set_feature(>env, ARM_FEATURE_A64FX);
> > set_feature(>env, ARM_FEATURE_V8);
> > set_feature(>env, ARM_FEATURE_NEON);
> > set_feature(>env, ARM_FEATURE_GENERIC_TIMER);
>
>
> --
> Alex Bennée
RE: [PATCH v2 1/3] target-arm: delete ARM_FEATURE_A64FX
> This feature doesn't exist in upstream QEMU, so this won't apply.
> For a v2 of a patch, the patches should be based on upstream, not on top of
> the v1
> series.
Thank you for your comment.
I understood your point.
Best regards.
> -Original Message-
> From: Peter Maydell
> Sent: Friday, July 30, 2021 7:35 PM
> To: Ishii, Shuuichirou/石井 周一郎
> Cc: qemu-arm ; QEMU Developers
>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] target-arm: delete ARM_FEATURE_A64FX
>
> On Fri, 30 Jul 2021 at 04:08, Shuuichirou Ishii
> wrote:
> >
> > The ARM_FEATURE_A64FX property was added, but there is no function
> > that uses this property yet, so it will be removed until a function
> > that uses it is added.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Shuuichirou Ishii
> > ---
> > target/arm/cpu.h | 1 -
> > target/arm/cpu64.c | 1 -
> > 2 files changed, 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/target/arm/cpu.h b/target/arm/cpu.h index
> > 1b0c7b91ec..9f0a5f84d5 100644
> > --- a/target/arm/cpu.h
> > +++ b/target/arm/cpu.h
> > @@ -2145,7 +2145,6 @@ enum arm_features {
> > ARM_FEATURE_M_SECURITY, /* M profile Security Extension */
> > ARM_FEATURE_M_MAIN, /* M profile Main Extension */
> > ARM_FEATURE_V8_1M, /* M profile extras only in v8.1M and later */
> > -ARM_FEATURE_A64FX, /* Fujitsu A64FX processor HPC extensions
> support */
> > };
>
> This feature doesn't exist in upstream QEMU, so this won't apply.
>
> For a v2 of a patch, the patches should be based on upstream, not on top of
> the v1
> series.
>
> thanks
> -- PMM
Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] target-arm: delete ARM_FEATURE_A64FX
Shuuichirou Ishii writes:
> The ARM_FEATURE_A64FX property was added,
> but there is no function that uses this property yet,
> so it will be removed until a function that uses it is added.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shuuichirou Ishii
> ---
> target/arm/cpu.h | 1 -
> target/arm/cpu64.c | 1 -
> 2 files changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/target/arm/cpu.h b/target/arm/cpu.h
> index 1b0c7b91ec..9f0a5f84d5 100644
> --- a/target/arm/cpu.h
> +++ b/target/arm/cpu.h
> @@ -2145,7 +2145,6 @@ enum arm_features {
> ARM_FEATURE_M_SECURITY, /* M profile Security Extension */
> ARM_FEATURE_M_MAIN, /* M profile Main Extension */
> ARM_FEATURE_V8_1M, /* M profile extras only in v8.1M and later */
> -ARM_FEATURE_A64FX, /* Fujitsu A64FX processor HPC extensions
> support */
This is confusing because I can't see this feature flag in the mainline
branch. Have you inadvertently based this series from an internal branch?
> };
>
> static inline int arm_feature(CPUARMState *env, int feature)
> diff --git a/target/arm/cpu64.c b/target/arm/cpu64.c
> index a15f9c0c55..dd72300e88 100644
> --- a/target/arm/cpu64.c
> +++ b/target/arm/cpu64.c
> @@ -856,7 +856,6 @@ static void aarch64_a64fx_initfn(Object *obj)
> ARMCPU *cpu = ARM_CPU(obj);
>
> cpu->dtb_compatible = "arm,a64fx";
> -set_feature(>env, ARM_FEATURE_A64FX);
> set_feature(>env, ARM_FEATURE_V8);
> set_feature(>env, ARM_FEATURE_NEON);
> set_feature(>env, ARM_FEATURE_GENERIC_TIMER);
--
Alex Bennée
Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] target-arm: delete ARM_FEATURE_A64FX
On Fri, 30 Jul 2021 at 04:08, Shuuichirou Ishii
wrote:
>
> The ARM_FEATURE_A64FX property was added,
> but there is no function that uses this property yet,
> so it will be removed until a function that uses it is added.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shuuichirou Ishii
> ---
> target/arm/cpu.h | 1 -
> target/arm/cpu64.c | 1 -
> 2 files changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/target/arm/cpu.h b/target/arm/cpu.h
> index 1b0c7b91ec..9f0a5f84d5 100644
> --- a/target/arm/cpu.h
> +++ b/target/arm/cpu.h
> @@ -2145,7 +2145,6 @@ enum arm_features {
> ARM_FEATURE_M_SECURITY, /* M profile Security Extension */
> ARM_FEATURE_M_MAIN, /* M profile Main Extension */
> ARM_FEATURE_V8_1M, /* M profile extras only in v8.1M and later */
> -ARM_FEATURE_A64FX, /* Fujitsu A64FX processor HPC extensions support */
> };
This feature doesn't exist in upstream QEMU, so this won't apply.
For a v2 of a patch, the patches should be based on upstream, not
on top of the v1 series.
thanks
-- PMM
