On Mon, Jun 29, 2026 at 01:00:05PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > On Thu, 18 Jun 2026 at 17:33, Jim MacArthur <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Reviewed-by: Richard Henderson <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Jim MacArthur <[email protected]> > > --- > > target/arm/tcg/cpu64.c | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/target/arm/tcg/cpu64.c b/target/arm/tcg/cpu64.c > > index f7a920a202..75c2027900 100644 > > --- a/target/arm/tcg/cpu64.c > > +++ b/target/arm/tcg/cpu64.c > > @@ -159,8 +159,8 @@ static void cpu_arm_set_rme(Object *obj, bool value, > > Error **errp) > > { > > ARMCPU *cpu = ARM_CPU(obj); > > > > - /* Enable FEAT_RME_GPC2 */ > > - FIELD_DP64_IDREG(&cpu->isar, ID_AA64PFR0, RME, value ? 2 : 0); > > + /* Enable FEAT_RME_GPC3 */ > > + FIELD_DP64_IDREG(&cpu->isar, ID_AA64PFR0, RME, value ? 3 : 0); > > } > > Just noticed this, but does this mean we should now list > FEAT_RME_GPC3 in docs/system/arm/emulation.rst ? > (If so, we can fix that as a followup patch.) >
Looking at this again, we don't currently implement the APAS instruction which is a necessary part of FEAT_RME_GPC3, so probably shouldn't advertise that in the documentation yet. I'm unsure how to handle this instruction at the moment; it might be that we can simply decode it and ignore it, in which case I can easily make up another patch to complete FEAT_RME_GPC3, but if not I'll need to seek further advice. Jim
