On 9 February 2014 03:09, Peter Crosthwaite
<peter.crosthwa...@xilinx.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 1:45 AM, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org>
> wrote:
>>
>> +static CPAccessResult ats_access(CPUARMState *env, const ARMCPRegInfo *ri)
>> +{
>> + if (ri->opc2 & 4) {
>> + /* Other states are only available with TrustZone; in
>
> A nit, but following earlier discussions there in no mention of
> "TrustZone" in ARM ARM. Should this be "security extensions"?
This is just a movement of an existing comment:
>> - if (ri->opc2 & 4) {
>> - /* Other states are only available with TrustZone */
>> - return EXCP_UDEF;
>> - }
I'm not going to go through changing all the references to "Neon"
to "AdvSIMD" either...
thanks
-- PMM
