On 28 December 2015 at 01:55, Michael Davidsaver wrote:
> On 12/17/2015 10:38 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> We could use a comment here (a) explaining what we're doing and (b)
>> mentioning that this isn't architecturally correct -- ideally we should
>> catch these exception
On 27 December 2015 at 20:22, Michael Davidsaver wrote:
> On 12/17/2015 10:38 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 3 December 2015 at 00:18, Michael Davidsaver
>> wrote:
>>> Add CPU unassigned access handler in place of special
>>> MemoryRegion to catch
On 12/17/2015 10:38 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 3 December 2015 at 00:18, Michael Davidsaver wrote:
>> Add CPU unassigned access handler in place of special
>> MemoryRegion to catch exception returns.
>>
>> The unassigned handler will signal other faults as either
>>
On 12/17/2015 10:38 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> We could use a comment here (a) explaining what we're doing and (b)
> mentioning that this isn't architecturally correct -- ideally we should
> catch these exception exits on execution of the jump insn, not by
> letting the jump execute and then
On 3 December 2015 at 00:18, Michael Davidsaver wrote:
> Add CPU unassigned access handler in place of special
> MemoryRegion to catch exception returns.
>
> The unassigned handler will signal other faults as either
> prefetch or data exceptions, with the FSR code 0x8 to
>
Add CPU unassigned access handler in place of special
MemoryRegion to catch exception returns.
The unassigned handler will signal other faults as either
prefetch or data exceptions, with the FSR code 0x8 to
distinguish them from memory translation faults (0xd).
Future code will make use of this