On 07/29/2014 09:31 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> Given that env->regs[] is uint32_t, does it actually change the final
> result?
Ah, no. I mis-remembered regs and xregs being shared.
r~
On 29 July 2014 20:25, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 07/25/2014 05:23 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> +env->regs[15] = info->entry & 0xfffe;
>
> You'd do well to use a U suffix here, otherwise c89 makes this -2 while c99
> does what you want. Which makes a tiny difference on a 64-
On 07/25/2014 05:23 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> +env->regs[15] = info->entry & 0xfffe;
You'd do well to use a U suffix here, otherwise c89 makes this -2 while c99
does what you want. Which makes a tiny difference on a 64-bit host.
r~
On 07/25/2014 11:23 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> The code in do_cpu_reset() correctly handled AArch64 CPUs
> when running Linux kernels, but was missing code in the
> branch of the if() that deals with loading ELF files.
> Correctly jump to the ELF entry point on reset rather than
> leaving the reset
The code in do_cpu_reset() correctly handled AArch64 CPUs
when running Linux kernels, but was missing code in the
branch of the if() that deals with loading ELF files.
Correctly jump to the ELF entry point on reset rather than
leaving the reset PC at zero.
Reported-by: Christopher Covington
Signe
