Conversation
Ubuntu 20.04 is no longer available. See actions/runner-images#11101 Checkpatch-ignore: BAD_SIGN_OFF Change-Id: I0ec3e3342f9212a2a79d8dca6274e7db62ecedab Signed-off-by: Evgeniy Naydanov <evgeniy.naydanov@syntacore.com>
…-spec This pulls in some improvements from the riscv-debug-spec repo, and cleans up the licensing (riscv-debug-spec changed the license to dual CC-BY-4.0 and BSD-2-Clause specifically to make sure the generated debug_defines files don't conflict with OpenOCD licensing) Signed-off-by: Bernhard Rosenkränzer <bero@baylibre.com>
lz-bro
force-pushed
the
add-dcsr-cetrig-control
branch
3 times, most recently
from
6b88574 to
605e820
Compare
en-sc
left a comment
en-sc
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for the patch!
Overall it looks great, the only concern I have is with the new return from riscv013_halt_reason(). I'm not sure RISCV_HALT_ERROR is the proper return code. I'd suggest adding a new status and handling it differently at the callsite.
Also, how did you test the changes? Is this at all possible to extend riscv-tests to include relevant tests?
| return RISCV_HALT_GROUP; | ||
| case CSR_DCSR_CAUSE_OTHER: | ||
| if (get_field(dcsr, CSR_DCSR_EXTCAUSE) == 0) { | ||
| LOG_TARGET_WARNING(target, "halted because of hart in a critical error state."); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| LOG_TARGET_WARNING(target, "halted because of hart in a critical error state."); | |
| LOG_TARGET_INFO(target, "halted because of hart in a critical error state."); |
I believe INFO is more appropriate here, since this is completely normal from the debugger's point of view.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am sorry but would like to disagree.
Even though this is not an error of OpenOCD or of the debug transport (JTAG adapter or similar), it is situation that is clearly exceptional and requires user attention. As such, it should be prominently displayed to the user. So a warning is in my opinion warranted here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@JanMatCodasip, I will insist)
- IMHO a similar example will be an assertion failure. GDB does not warn about an assertion failure -- it just notifies you.
- To be honest, this seems like an issue with the spec, but: what if the
Smdbltrpextension is not implemented? Thecausemay still beotherbut this is not an exceptional situation.
lz-bro
force-pushed
the
add-dcsr-cetrig-control
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d1d2b0a to
aed2254
Compare
|
JanMatCodasip
left a comment
JanMatCodasip
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Overall this looks good. I have managed a partial review and am sending my comments so far.
lz-bro
force-pushed
the
add-dcsr-cetrig-control
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d368717 to
31e3406
Compare
JanMatCodasip
left a comment
JanMatCodasip
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have few more comments, otherwise the changes look good.
| return RISCV_HALT_GROUP; | ||
| case CSR_DCSR_CAUSE_OTHER: | ||
| if (get_field(dcsr, CSR_DCSR_EXTCAUSE) == 0) { | ||
| LOG_TARGET_WARNING(target, "halted because of hart in a critical error state."); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am sorry but would like to disagree.
Even though this is not an error of OpenOCD or of the debug transport (JTAG adapter or similar), it is situation that is clearly exceptional and requires user attention. As such, it should be prominently displayed to the user. So a warning is in my opinion warranted here.
lz-bro
force-pushed
the
add-dcsr-cetrig-control
branch
from
31e3406 to
fb914e0
Compare
Introduce RISC-V-sepecific `configure` parameter `-cetrig`
lz-bro
force-pushed
the
add-dcsr-cetrig-control
branch
from
fb914e0 to
65b6aab
Compare
4 participants
Introduce RISC-V-sepecific
configureparameter-cetrig