On Fri, 27 May 2022 at 19:07, Richard Henderson
<richard.henderson@linaro.org> wrote:
We don't need to constrain the value set in zcr_el[1],
because it will be done by sve_zcr_len_for_el.
Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>
---
target/arm/cpu.c | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/target/arm/cpu.c b/target/arm/cpu.c
index d2bd74c2ed..0621944167 100644
--- a/target/arm/cpu.c
+++ b/target/arm/cpu.c
@@ -208,8 +208,7 @@ static void arm_cpu_reset(DeviceState *dev)
CPACR_EL1, ZEN, 3);
/* with reasonable vector length */
if (cpu_isar_feature(aa64_sve, cpu)) {
- env->vfp.zcr_el[1] =
- aarch64_sve_zcr_get_valid_len(cpu, cpu->sve_default_vq - 1);
+ env->vfp.zcr_el[1] = cpu->sve_default_vq - 1;
}
I'm still not a fan of the zcr_el[] value not actually being
a valid one. I'd rather we constrained it when we write the
value into the field.