Am Thu, 12 Dec 2019 20:40:45 +0100 schrieb Laurent Vivier <laur...@vivier.eu>:
> This is used by netBSD (and MacOS ROM) to detect the MMU type > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <laur...@vivier.eu> > --- > target/m68k/cpu.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++------ > target/m68k/cpu.h | 4 ++++ > target/m68k/helper.c | 16 ++++++++++++++-- > 3 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/target/m68k/cpu.c b/target/m68k/cpu.c > index e6596de29c..1d202cec49 100644 > --- a/target/m68k/cpu.c > +++ b/target/m68k/cpu.c > @@ -114,11 +114,8 @@ static void m68000_cpu_initfn(Object *obj) > m68k_set_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_MOVEP); > } > > -static void m68020_cpu_initfn(Object *obj) > +static void m680x0_cpu_common(CPUM68KState *env) > { > - M68kCPU *cpu = M68K_CPU(obj); > - CPUM68KState *env = &cpu->env; > - > m68k_set_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_M68000); > m68k_set_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_USP); > m68k_set_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_WORD_INDEX); > @@ -136,14 +133,32 @@ static void m68020_cpu_initfn(Object *obj) > m68k_set_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_CHK2); > m68k_set_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_MOVEP); > } > -#define m68030_cpu_initfn m68020_cpu_initfn > + > +static void m68020_cpu_initfn(Object *obj) > +{ > + M68kCPU *cpu = M68K_CPU(obj); > + CPUM68KState *env = &cpu->env; > + > + m680x0_cpu_common(env); > + m68k_set_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_MMU68851); > +} > + > +static void m68030_cpu_initfn(Object *obj) > +{ > + M68kCPU *cpu = M68K_CPU(obj); > + CPUM68KState *env = &cpu->env; > + > + m680x0_cpu_common(env); > + m68k_set_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_MMU68030); > +} > > static void m68040_cpu_initfn(Object *obj) > { > M68kCPU *cpu = M68K_CPU(obj); > CPUM68KState *env = &cpu->env; > > - m68020_cpu_initfn(obj); > + m680x0_cpu_common(env); > + m68k_set_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_MMU68040); > m68k_set_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_M68040); > } > > @@ -166,6 +181,7 @@ static void m68060_cpu_initfn(Object *obj) > m68k_set_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_BKPT); > m68k_set_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_RTD); > m68k_set_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_CHK2); > + m68k_set_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_MMU68060); > } > > static void m5208_cpu_initfn(Object *obj) > diff --git a/target/m68k/cpu.h b/target/m68k/cpu.h > index 20de3c379a..36e4353b44 100644 > --- a/target/m68k/cpu.h > +++ b/target/m68k/cpu.h > @@ -483,6 +483,10 @@ enum m68k_features { > M68K_FEATURE_CHK2, > M68K_FEATURE_M68040, /* instructions specific to MC68040 */ > M68K_FEATURE_MOVEP, > + M68K_FEATURE_MMU68851, > + M68K_FEATURE_MMU68030, > + M68K_FEATURE_MMU68040, > + M68K_FEATURE_MMU68060, > }; > > static inline int m68k_feature(CPUM68KState *env, int feature) > diff --git a/target/m68k/helper.c b/target/m68k/helper.c > index ae766a6cb0..b5758bbd7d 100644 > --- a/target/m68k/helper.c > +++ b/target/m68k/helper.c > @@ -205,7 +205,13 @@ void HELPER(m68k_movec_to)(CPUM68KState *env, > uint32_t reg, uint32_t val) return; > /* MC680[234]0 */ > case M68K_CR_CACR: > - env->cacr = val; > + if (m68k_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_MMU68040)) { Why is the *Cache* control register tied to an MMU feature? Maybe use M68K_FEATURE_M68040 instead? Or call the new flag M68K_FEATURE_CACHE040 instead? > + env->cacr = val & 0x80008000; > + } else if (m68k_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_MMU68030)) { > + env->cacr = val & 0x00003fff; That seems to be too much, according to my MC68030 UM, there are some bits tied to zero inbetween. The correct mask should be 0x3f1f, I think. > + } else if (m68k_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_MMU68851)) { > + env->cacr = val & 0x0000000f; > + } What about the 68060? It has yet another set of bits in the CACR... > m68k_switch_sp(env); > return; > /* MC680[34]0 */ > @@ -261,7 +267,13 @@ uint32_t HELPER(m68k_movec_from)(CPUM68KState > *env, uint32_t reg) return env->vbr; > /* MC680[234]0 */ > case M68K_CR_CACR: > - return env->cacr; > + if (m68k_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_MMU68040)) { > + return env->cacr & 0x80008000; > + } else if (m68k_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_MMU68030)) { > + return env->cacr & 0x00003fff; > + } else if (m68k_feature(env, M68K_FEATURE_MMU68851)) { > + return env->cacr & 0x0000000f; > + } Wouldn't it be enough to do the masking either only during the "from" or during the "to" move? If you want to do it for both, I'd suggest to declare a little helper function for the masking instead, so that you don't have to repeat the code. Thomas