On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 9:22 AM, Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Jan 2015 16:30:17 -0600
> Greg Bellows <greg.bell...@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> > Adds a CPU feature parsing function and assigns to the CPU class. The
> only
> > feature added was "-aarch64" which disabled the AArch64 execution state
> on a
> > 64-bit ARM CPU.
> >
> > Also adds stripping of features from CPU model string in acquiring the
> ARM CPU
> > by name.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Greg Bellows <greg.bell...@linaro.org>
> > ---
> > target-arm/cpu.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/target-arm/cpu.c b/target-arm/cpu.c
> > index 285947f..f327dd7 100644
> > --- a/target-arm/cpu.c
> > +++ b/target-arm/cpu.c
> > @@ -514,13 +514,17 @@ static ObjectClass *arm_cpu_class_by_name(const
> char *cpu_model)
> > {
> > ObjectClass *oc;
> > char *typename;
> > + char *cpuname;
> >
> > if (!cpu_model) {
> > return NULL;
> > }
> >
> > - typename = g_strdup_printf("%s-" TYPE_ARM_CPU, cpu_model);
> > + cpuname = g_strdup(cpu_model);
> > + cpuname = strtok(cpuname, ",");
> > + typename = g_strdup_printf("%s-" TYPE_ARM_CPU, cpuname);
> > oc = object_class_by_name(typename);
> > + g_free(cpuname);
> > g_free(typename);
> > if (!oc || !object_class_dynamic_cast(oc, TYPE_ARM_CPU) ||
> > object_class_is_abstract(oc)) {
> > @@ -1163,6 +1167,44 @@ static Property arm_cpu_properties[] = {
> > DEFINE_PROP_END_OF_LIST()
> > };
> >
> > +static void arm_cpu_parse_features(CPUState *cs, char *features,
> > + Error **errp)
> > +{
> > + ARMCPU *cpu = ARM_CPU(cs);
> > + char *featurestr;
> > +
> > + featurestr = features ? strtok(features, ",") : NULL;
> > + while (featurestr) {
> > + if (featurestr[0] == '-') {
> ...
> > + } else if (featurestr[0] == '+') {
> Please do not use legacy +-feature format and support only foo=val format.
> Other targets have it only for to being able support legacy setups
> which use +- format.
>
>
Thanks Igor. I was under the impression that the +/- notation was still
relevant. Perhaps it makes the most sense to convert to using object
properties similar to how machine options are specified? What do you think
Peter?
> > + /* Everything else is a bad format */
> > + error_setg(errp, "CPU property string '%s' not in format "
> > + "(+feature|-feature|feature=xyz)",
> featurestr);
>
>
> > + return;
> > + }
> > + featurestr = strtok(NULL, ",");
> > + }
> > +}
> > +
> > static void arm_cpu_class_init(ObjectClass *oc, void *data)
> > {
> > ARMCPUClass *acc = ARM_CPU_CLASS(oc);
> > @@ -1183,6 +1225,7 @@ static void arm_cpu_class_init(ObjectClass *oc,
> void *data)
> > cc->set_pc = arm_cpu_set_pc;
> > cc->gdb_read_register = arm_cpu_gdb_read_register;
> > cc->gdb_write_register = arm_cpu_gdb_write_register;
> > + cc->parse_features = arm_cpu_parse_features;
> > #ifdef CONFIG_USER_ONLY
> > cc->handle_mmu_fault = arm_cpu_handle_mmu_fault;
> > #else
>
>
