Hi Peng, On 21/09/15 08:07, Peng Fan wrote: > To ARM64, "if ( hsr.ec >= 0x10 ) return 1;" is ok for unconditional > check, but to ARM32, we need to use 'hsr.ec >> 30' to check.
hsr.ec is encoded on 5 bits, therefore the shift you suggest is wrong. Maybe you wanted to use (hsr.ec >> 4)? Although, can you explain why you need a different check for ARM32? Regards, > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng....@freescale.com> > Cc: Ian Campbell <ian.campb...@citrix.com> > Cc: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabell...@citrix.com> > Cc: Julien Grall <julien.gr...@citrix.com> > --- > xen/arch/arm/traps.c | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/traps.c b/xen/arch/arm/traps.c > index 9d2bd6a..2e2b1f2 100644 > --- a/xen/arch/arm/traps.c > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/traps.c > @@ -1531,8 +1531,13 @@ static int check_conditional_instr(struct > cpu_user_regs *regs, > int cond; > > /* Unconditional Exception classes */ > +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM_64 > if ( hsr.ec >= 0x10 ) > return 1; > +#else > + if ( hsr.ec >> 30 ) > + return 1; > +#endif > > /* Check for valid condition in hsr */ > cond = hsr.cond.ccvalid ? hsr.cond.cc : -1; > -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel