> The major reason IMHO to add a Cortex-M85 model would be to > have a CPU that supports M-profile PACBTI, so wouldn't > it be better to implement the feature first and then > add the CPU and the board model that uses it ? > > thanks > -- PMM
Hey Peter, thanks for the quick reply on this and the other bug fix patch I sent! I understand your reasoning behind adding the feature first then the CPU/boards so that there's something to use the features. I looked through the patchew and saw that was how you handled it with the M55 CPU and v8.1-m features. To explain myself, this patch series was a part of my intern project at HPE. We currently have a fork of QEMU where we use it to emulate the HPE BMC. I am working on implementing the currently unavailable M85 CPU with the Custom Datapath Extension for internal use. I thought I could potentially upstream only the M85 CPU and related machines. I didn't include CDE because it was not fully polished and PACBTI because it was not super critical to my experimentations. I do agree there are no architectural differences between the M55 and M85 right now so I fully understand if this patch series is not sufficient for upstreaming. Best regards, Simon Xu
