Re: [PATCH 3/8] target/arm: use FIELD macro for CNTHCTL bit definitions

[Richard Henderson]

On 3/1/24 08:32, Peter Maydell wrote:
> We prefer the FIELD macro over ad-hoc #defines for register bits;
> switch CNTHCTL to that style before we add any more bits.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
> ---
>   target/arm/internals.h | 19 +++++++++++++++++--
>   target/arm/helper.c    |  9 ++++-----
>   2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/target/arm/internals.h b/target/arm/internals.h
> index c93acb270cc..6553e414934 100644
> --- a/target/arm/internals.h
> +++ b/target/arm/internals.h
> @@ -224,8 +224,23 @@ FIELD(VTCR, SL2, 33, 1)
>   #define HSTR_TTEE (1 << 16)
>   #define HSTR_TJDBX (1 << 17)
>   
> -#define CNTHCTL_CNTVMASK      (1 << 18)
> -#define CNTHCTL_CNTPMASK      (1 << 19)
> +FIELD(CNTHCTL, EL0PCTEN, 0, 1)
> +FIELD(CNTHCTL, EL0VCTEN, 1, 1)
> +FIELD(CNTHCTL, EVNTEN, 2, 1)
> +FIELD(CNTHCTL, EVNTDIR, 3, 1)
...
> +FIELD(CNTHCTL, EL0VTEN, 8, 1)
> +FIELD(CNTHCTL, EL0PTEN, 9, 1)
> +FIELD(CNTHCTL, EL1PCTEN, 10, 1)
> +FIELD(CNTHCTL, EL1PTEN, 11, 1)

These bits change definition based on HCR_E2H, which I remembered when I got to patch 5, 
which adds code nearby the existing tests of these bits.

It might be confusing to only provide the E2H versions, without some extra 
suffix?


r~