On 18 September 2017 at 14:27, sundeep subbaraya <sundeep.l...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Peter, > > On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 3:47 PM, sundeep subbaraya <sundeep.l...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Hi Philippe, >> >> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 6:31 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4...@amsat.org> >> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Sundeep, Peter, >>> >>> >>> On 09/15/2017 01:59 PM, Subbaraya Sundeep wrote: >>>> >>>> +static void msf2_sysreg_write(void *opaque, hwaddr offset, >>>> + uint64_t val, unsigned size) >>>> +{ >>>> + MSF2SysregState *s = opaque; >>>> + uint32_t newval = val; >>>> + >>>> + offset >>= 2; >>>> + >>>> + switch (offset) { >>>> + case MSSDDR_PLL_STATUS: >>>> + trace_msf2_sysreg_write_pll_status(); >>>> + break; >>>> + >>>> + case ESRAM_CR: >>>> + case DDR_CR: >>>> + case ENVM_REMAP_BASE_CR: >>>> + if (newval != s->regs[offset]) { >>>> + qemu_log_mask(LOG_UNIMP, >>>> + TYPE_MSF2_SYSREG": remapping not supported\n"); >>> >>> >>> I'd rather exit here than continue with inconsistent cpu, Peter what do >>> you recommend? > > > Could you please suggest.
We shouldn't exit QEMU for something the guest can provoke. If the functionality isn't implemented then just LOG_UNIMP it. thanks -- PMM