Indicate the actual features in the STFL implementation and implement
STFLE.
Signed-off-by: Michal Marek
---
v4:
- Remove redundant buffer clearing in do_stfle()
- Always store whole doublewords in STFLE
- Use s390_cpu_virt_mem_write() to store the result
- Raise a specification exception if
On 02/27/2017 09:18 PM, Michal Marek wrote:
Indicate the actual features in the STFL implementation and implement
STFLE.
Signed-off-by: Michal Marek
---
v4:
- Remove redundant buffer clearing in do_stfle()
- Always store whole doublewords in STFLE
- Use s390_cpu_virt_mem_write() to store the
On 28.02.2017 23:11, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 02/27/2017 09:18 PM, Michal Marek wrote:
>> Indicate the actual features in the STFL implementation and implement
>> STFLE.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Marek
>> ---
>> v4:
>> - Remove redundant buffer clearing in do_stfle()
>> - Always store who
On 03/01/2017 07:00 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
Primarily, it does not raise an exception for error.
Protection and page faults should be generated properly via
trigger_access_exception() there ... or did I miss something?
So why does s390_cpu_virt_mem_rw document that it returns non-zero if there
On 01.03.2017 20:30, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 03/01/2017 07:00 PM, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> Primarily, it does not raise an exception for error.
>>
>> Protection and page faults should be generated properly via
>> trigger_access_exception() there ... or did I miss something?
>
> So why does s39
Dne 28.2.2017 v 23:11 Richard Henderson napsal(a):
> On 02/27/2017 09:18 PM, Michal Marek wrote:
>> +static int do_stfle(CPUS390XState *env, uint64_t addr, uint32_t ar,
>> int len)
>> +{
>> +S390CPU *cpu = s390_env_get_cpu(env);
>> +/* 256 doublewords as per STFLE documentation */
>> +u
>>> Of course, in practice we could reduce this to just one cpu_stl_data for
>>> STFL and one or two cpu_stq_data for STFLE.
>>
>> I think STFLE can store more than two 64-bit words, can't it?
>
> Technically, yes. But there are less than 128 bits defined. Certainly much
> less than the 4k bits
>> As it happens, this reminds me that I wrote a version of this several
>> years ago but never submitted it upstream. I'll dig it out.
>
> So, does it make sense for me to post a v5 again not using
> s390_cpu_virt_mem_write(), or are you going to refresh your stfle
> implementation?
>
> Thanks,
