On 6/20/23 17:41, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 19/6/23 16:23, Richard Henderson wrote:
The microblaze architecture does not reorder instructions.
While there is an MBAR wait-for-data-access instruction,
this concerns synchronizing with DMA.
This should have been defined when enabling MTTCG.
Cc: Alistair Francis <alistair.fran...@wdc.com>
Cc: Edgar E. Iglesias <edgar.igles...@gmail.com>
Fixes: d449561b130 ("configure: microblaze: Enable mttcg")
Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org>
---
target/microblaze/cpu.h | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/target/microblaze/cpu.h b/target/microblaze/cpu.h
index 88324d0bc1..b474abcc2a 100644
--- a/target/microblaze/cpu.h
+++ b/target/microblaze/cpu.h
@@ -24,6 +24,9 @@
#include "exec/cpu-defs.h"
#include "qemu/cpu-float.h"
+/* MicroBlaze is always in-order. */
+#define TCG_GUEST_DEFAULT_MO TCG_MO_ALL
Targets missing such definition:
- cris
- m68k
- nios2
- rx
- sh4
- sparc/64 (!)
- tricore
I expect targets designed for embedded systems
to be in-order for power efficiency.
What about having each target being explicit about that,
having a build failure if TCG_GUEST_DEFAULT_MO is not defined,
instead of the '#ifdef TCG_GUEST_DEFAULT_MO' in accel/tcg/?
I'd be ok with that.
r~
