qemu-arm
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-arm] [PATCH-for-4.1] target/arm: Add missing break statement f


From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé
Subject: Re: [Qemu-arm] [PATCH-for-4.1] target/arm: Add missing break statement for Hypervisor Trap Exception
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2019 14:59:04 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0

On 7/19/19 1:47 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Jul 2019 at 12:15, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <address@hidden> wrote:
>>
>> Reported by GCC9 when building with  -Wimplicit-fallthrough=2:
>>
>>   target/arm/helper.c: In function ‘arm_cpu_do_interrupt_aarch32_hyp’:
>>   target/arm/helper.c:7958:14: error: this statement may fall through 
>> [-Werror=implicit-fallthrough=]
>>    7958 |         addr = 0x14;
>>         |         ~~~~~^~~~~~
>>   target/arm/helper.c:7959:5: note: here
>>    7959 |     default:
>>         |     ^~~~~~~
>>   cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
>>
>> Fixes: b9bc21ff9f9
>> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <address@hidden>
>> ---
>>  target/arm/helper.c | 1 +
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/target/arm/helper.c b/target/arm/helper.c
>> index 20f8728be1..b74c23a9bc 100644
>> --- a/target/arm/helper.c
>> +++ b/target/arm/helper.c
>> @@ -7956,6 +7956,7 @@ static void arm_cpu_do_interrupt_aarch32_hyp(CPUState 
>> *cs)
>>          break;
>>      case EXCP_HYP_TRAP:
>>          addr = 0x14;
>> +        break;
>>      default:
>>          cpu_abort(cs, "Unhandled exception 0x%x\n", cs->exception_index);
>>      }
> 
> I think this is right, but EXCP_HYP_TRAP is a bit odd -- we appear
> to use this only for the case of "SMC instruction is trapped from
> NS EL1 to EL2 by HCR.TSC". I was expecting more traps-to-EL2
> to use this EXCP_ variable... Mostly we seem to use EXCP_UDEF,
> eg for CP_ACCESS_TRAP_UNCATEGORIZED_EL2 coprocessor/sysreg accesses:
> this has the same behaviour as EXCP_HYP_TRAP as long as we know
> we are going from an EL below 2 to EL2. Which I think we could
> also use in the one place we use EXCP_HYP_TRAP; or we could make
> wider use of EXCP_HYP_TRAP, since feeding everything through
> EXCP_UDEF is rather confusing.
> 
> Anyway, for 4.1 we should do this.
> Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell <address@hidden>

Thanks, if you take this I forgot to mention:
Reported-by: Stefan Weil <address@hidden>

Regards,

Phil.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]