On 19 January 2014 01:46, Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwa...@xilinx.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Peter Maydell > <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: >> IIRC ARMv4 and earlier didn't define the MIDR, but we don't >> actually emulate any of those. In general, my intent with all these >> constant fields in the ARMCPU struct was that we'd end up making >> them just properties available on all ARMCPU objects, and if the >> particular subtype of ARMCPU happened not to have FP and so >> didn't need the reset_fpsid, for example, it would just ignore whatever >> value you set the property to. I don't think we need to tie ourselves >> in knots to restrict the properties to particular CPUs if it is too >> implementationally awkward (though it would be nice if we can >> tie them to ARM_FEATURE_* bits for more or less free). >> > > ARM_FEATURE_V5 exists. Will that do the job? That will exclude just > the V4T AFAICT. Worth bothering?
Probably not for MIDR, I think, though maybe for some of the others we might like to. thanks -- PMM
