On Oct 15 12:50, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 10/10/18 1:37 PM, Aaron Lindsay wrote: > > pmccntr_read and pmccntr_write contained duplicate code that was already > > being handled by pmccntr_sync. Consolidate the duplicated code into two > > functions: pmccntr_op_start and pmccntr_op_finish. Add a companion to > > c15_ccnt in CPUARMState so that we can simultaneously save both the > > architectural register value and the last underlying cycle count - this > > ensures time isn't lost and will also allow us to access the 'old' > > architectural register value in order to detect overflows in later > > patches. > > > > Signed-off-by: Aaron Lindsay <alind...@codeaurora.org> > > --- > > target/arm/cpu.h | 26 ++++++++---- > > target/arm/helper.c | 96 +++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------- > > target/arm/machine.c | 8 ++-- > > 3 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-) > > Ok, looking at this follow-up makes more sense than the previous patch. Would > it make sense to squash these two together?
I was attempting to keep the migration plumbing separate from the PMU implementation details, but I'm not particularly partial to this staging. > It also makes sense why you'd need the post_save hook. Okay. I attempted to describe this in the commit message in a way that communicated the need for the hook without being overly verbose - but suggestions in that area are very welcome if you think a different commit message would help. -Aaron
