Hello, it has been a long time since I added this review request, so thanks for the reply. In the meantime I noticed that there is already an implementation for long mode interrupts. It's located in arch/x86/isa/insts/romutil.py and it is used for all the hardware interrupts. Wouldn't it be a better solution to just setup t1 and t7 with the correct vector number and ip and just jump there? The code in romutil should do the same and covers some more cases then my code.
For the code in the .isa file I'm not sure how this works. I tried around and this seemed to work. So there is probably a better solution ;) For the 'xc->syscall()' I'm not sure what it does but in my case it is not needed because I'm running another OS in FS mode. So it might be that this does not work in other cases. Christian On Wednesday 28 August 2013 18:18:54 Nilay Vaish wrote: > On Wed, 28 Aug 2013, Steve Reinhardt wrote: > >> On Aug. 27, 2013, 8:59 a.m., Nilay Vaish wrote: > >>> I do not like that form WarnUnimpl being repeated all over the place. > >>> Can you try if something else works? > >> > >> Ali Saidi wrote: > >> I'm afraid that is somewhat like how the isa description language > >> works. Perhaps the unimplemented case could be the default and > >> overwritten else where, but i don't think it's going to improve the > >> situation much.> > > On closer inspection, all the 'format WarnUnimpl' clauses are > > unnecessary. The old code was just setting the default format to > > WarnUnimpl, then overriding it in some cases with the Inst:: prefix > > (which is the default format outside of the 'format WarnUnimpl' block). > > So it's totally equivalent to get rid of the 'format WarnUnimpl' block, > > delete all the 'Inst::' prefixes, and add 'WarnUnimpl::' to the few > > unprefixed instruction declarations. I tried it, and it seems to > > work... I can't update this patch, but I'll upload another one. > > > > That said, I'm a little mystified how this code still works since the > > 'xc->syscall()' call seems to be missing entirely now. > > Steve, thanks for updating the patch. I think we should restore the check > on FullSystemInt and that should do the job. The intent was to introduce > the implementation of Int_Ib(), which it seems is needed only in the full > system mode. > > -- > Nilay _______________________________________________ gem5-dev mailing list [email protected] http://m5sim.org/mailman/listinfo/gem5-dev
