[PATCH v2 08/11] next-cube.c: move static old_scr2 variable to NeXTPC

Mark Cave-Ayland posted 11 patches 11 months, 1 week ago
Maintainers: Thomas Huth <huth@tuxfamily.org>
[PATCH v2 08/11] next-cube.c: move static old_scr2 variable to NeXTPC
Posted by Mark Cave-Ayland 11 months, 1 week ago
Move the old_scr2 variable to NeXTPC so that the old SCR2 register state is
stored along with the current SCR2 state.

Since the SCR2 register is 32-bits wide, convert old_scr2 to uint32_t and
update the SCR2 register access code to allow unaligned writes.

Note that this is a migration break, but as nothing will currently boot then
we do not need to worry about this now.

Signed-off-by: Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk>
---
 hw/m68k/next-cube.c | 12 +++++++++---
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/hw/m68k/next-cube.c b/hw/m68k/next-cube.c
index f2222554fa..d53f73fb8b 100644
--- a/hw/m68k/next-cube.c
+++ b/hw/m68k/next-cube.c
@@ -91,6 +91,7 @@ struct NeXTPC {
 
     uint32_t scr1;
     uint32_t scr2;
+    uint32_t old_scr2;
     uint32_t int_mask;
     uint32_t int_status;
     uint32_t led;
@@ -125,8 +126,7 @@ static const uint8_t rtc_ram2[32] = {
 
 static void nextscr2_write(NeXTPC *s, uint32_t val, int size)
 {
-    static uint8_t old_scr2;
-    uint8_t scr2_2;
+    uint8_t old_scr2, scr2_2;
     NextRtc *rtc = &s->rtc;
 
     if (size == 4) {
@@ -144,6 +144,8 @@ static void nextscr2_write(NeXTPC *s, uint32_t val, int size)
         }
     }
 
+    old_scr2 = (s->old_scr2 >> 8) & 0xff;
+
     if (scr2_2 & 0x1) {
         /* DPRINTF("RTC %x phase %i\n", scr2_2, rtc->phase); */
         if (rtc->phase == -1) {
@@ -252,7 +254,6 @@ static void nextscr2_write(NeXTPC *s, uint32_t val, int size)
     }
     s->scr2 = val & 0xFFFF00FF;
     s->scr2 |= scr2_2 << 8;
-    old_scr2 = scr2_2;
 }
 
 static uint64_t next_mmio_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned size)
@@ -318,7 +319,10 @@ static void next_mmio_write(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t val,
         break;
 
     case 0xd000 ... 0xd003:
+        s->scr2 = deposit32(s->scr2, (4 - (addr - 0xd000) - size) << 3,
+                            size << 3, val);
         nextscr2_write(s, val, size);
+        s->old_scr2 = s->scr2;
         break;
 
     default:
@@ -876,6 +880,7 @@ static void next_pc_reset(DeviceState *dev)
     /*     0x0000XX00 << vital bits */
     s->scr1 = 0x00011102;
     s->scr2 = 0x00ff0c80;
+    s->old_scr2 = s->scr2;
 
     s->rtc.status = 0x90;
 
@@ -932,6 +937,7 @@ static const VMStateDescription next_pc_vmstate = {
     .fields = (VMStateField[]) {
         VMSTATE_UINT32(scr1, NeXTPC),
         VMSTATE_UINT32(scr2, NeXTPC),
+        VMSTATE_UINT32(old_scr2, NeXTPC),
         VMSTATE_UINT32(int_mask, NeXTPC),
         VMSTATE_UINT32(int_status, NeXTPC),
         VMSTATE_UINT32(led, NeXTPC),
-- 
2.39.2
Re: [PATCH v2 08/11] next-cube.c: move static old_scr2 variable to NeXTPC
Posted by Thomas Huth 11 months, 1 week ago
Am Wed, 20 Dec 2023 13:16:38 +0000
schrieb Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk>:

> Move the old_scr2 variable to NeXTPC so that the old SCR2 register state is
> stored along with the current SCR2 state.
> 
> Since the SCR2 register is 32-bits wide, convert old_scr2 to uint32_t and
> update the SCR2 register access code to allow unaligned writes.
> 
> Note that this is a migration break, but as nothing will currently boot then
> we do not need to worry about this now.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk>
> ---
>  hw/m68k/next-cube.c | 12 +++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/hw/m68k/next-cube.c b/hw/m68k/next-cube.c
> index f2222554fa..d53f73fb8b 100644
> --- a/hw/m68k/next-cube.c
> +++ b/hw/m68k/next-cube.c
> @@ -91,6 +91,7 @@ struct NeXTPC {
>  
>      uint32_t scr1;
>      uint32_t scr2;
> +    uint32_t old_scr2;
>      uint32_t int_mask;
>      uint32_t int_status;
>      uint32_t led;
> @@ -125,8 +126,7 @@ static const uint8_t rtc_ram2[32] = {
>  
>  static void nextscr2_write(NeXTPC *s, uint32_t val, int size)
>  {
> -    static uint8_t old_scr2;
> -    uint8_t scr2_2;
> +    uint8_t old_scr2, scr2_2;
>      NextRtc *rtc = &s->rtc;
>  
>      if (size == 4) {
> @@ -144,6 +144,8 @@ static void nextscr2_write(NeXTPC *s, uint32_t val, int size)
>          }
>      }
>  
> +    old_scr2 = (s->old_scr2 >> 8) & 0xff;
> +
>      if (scr2_2 & 0x1) {
>          /* DPRINTF("RTC %x phase %i\n", scr2_2, rtc->phase); */
>          if (rtc->phase == -1) {
> @@ -252,7 +254,6 @@ static void nextscr2_write(NeXTPC *s, uint32_t val, int size)
>      }
>      s->scr2 = val & 0xFFFF00FF;
>      s->scr2 |= scr2_2 << 8;

So s->scr2 is updated with the "val" at the end of nextscr2_write() ... 

> -    old_scr2 = scr2_2;
>  }
>  
>  static uint64_t next_mmio_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned size)
> @@ -318,7 +319,10 @@ static void next_mmio_write(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t val,
>          break;
>  
>      case 0xd000 ... 0xd003:
> +        s->scr2 = deposit32(s->scr2, (4 - (addr - 0xd000) - size) << 3,
> +                            size << 3, val);

... but here it is also updated before nextscr2_write() ? Looks somewhat
strange. Though I have to admit that I don't fully understand the logic
here anyway... Maybe we could peek at Previous to see how this register is
supposed to behave?

 Thomas
Re: [PATCH v2 08/11] next-cube.c: move static old_scr2 variable to NeXTPC
Posted by Mark Cave-Ayland 11 months, 1 week ago
On 20/12/2023 19:20, Thomas Huth wrote:

> Am Wed, 20 Dec 2023 13:16:38 +0000
> schrieb Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk>:
> 
>> Move the old_scr2 variable to NeXTPC so that the old SCR2 register state is
>> stored along with the current SCR2 state.
>>
>> Since the SCR2 register is 32-bits wide, convert old_scr2 to uint32_t and
>> update the SCR2 register access code to allow unaligned writes.
>>
>> Note that this is a migration break, but as nothing will currently boot then
>> we do not need to worry about this now.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk>
>> ---
>>   hw/m68k/next-cube.c | 12 +++++++++---
>>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/m68k/next-cube.c b/hw/m68k/next-cube.c
>> index f2222554fa..d53f73fb8b 100644
>> --- a/hw/m68k/next-cube.c
>> +++ b/hw/m68k/next-cube.c
>> @@ -91,6 +91,7 @@ struct NeXTPC {
>>   
>>       uint32_t scr1;
>>       uint32_t scr2;
>> +    uint32_t old_scr2;
>>       uint32_t int_mask;
>>       uint32_t int_status;
>>       uint32_t led;
>> @@ -125,8 +126,7 @@ static const uint8_t rtc_ram2[32] = {
>>   
>>   static void nextscr2_write(NeXTPC *s, uint32_t val, int size)
>>   {
>> -    static uint8_t old_scr2;
>> -    uint8_t scr2_2;
>> +    uint8_t old_scr2, scr2_2;
>>       NextRtc *rtc = &s->rtc;
>>   
>>       if (size == 4) {
>> @@ -144,6 +144,8 @@ static void nextscr2_write(NeXTPC *s, uint32_t val, int size)
>>           }
>>       }
>>   
>> +    old_scr2 = (s->old_scr2 >> 8) & 0xff;
>> +
>>       if (scr2_2 & 0x1) {
>>           /* DPRINTF("RTC %x phase %i\n", scr2_2, rtc->phase); */
>>           if (rtc->phase == -1) {
>> @@ -252,7 +254,6 @@ static void nextscr2_write(NeXTPC *s, uint32_t val, int size)
>>       }
>>       s->scr2 = val & 0xFFFF00FF;
>>       s->scr2 |= scr2_2 << 8;
> 
> So s->scr2 is updated with the "val" at the end of nextscr2_write() ...
> 
>> -    old_scr2 = scr2_2;
>>   }
>>   
>>   static uint64_t next_mmio_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned size)
>> @@ -318,7 +319,10 @@ static void next_mmio_write(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t val,
>>           break;
>>   
>>       case 0xd000 ... 0xd003:
>> +        s->scr2 = deposit32(s->scr2, (4 - (addr - 0xd000) - size) << 3,
>> +                            size << 3, val);
> 
> ... but here it is also updated before nextscr2_write() ? Looks somewhat
> strange. Though I have to admit that I don't fully understand the logic
> here anyway... Maybe we could peek at Previous to see how this register is
> supposed to behave?

I'm fairly sure what's supposed to happen is that bits 8-15 of SCR2 are used to 
bit-bang the RTC and all the other values are preserved, hence the logic at the end 
of nextscr2_write(). What makes it slightly more confusing is that scr2_2 and 
old_scr2 in the current version of nextscr2_write() represent just bits 8-15 of SCR2 
and not the entire register.

This is something I tried to improve in the following 2 commits by splitting out the 
LED logic into its own function, and then finally updating old_scr2 to a 32-bit value 
to match scr2 and using extract32()/deposit32() in next_scr2_rtc_update() to make 
this process clearer.


ATB,

Mark.
Re: [PATCH v2 08/11] next-cube.c: move static old_scr2 variable to NeXTPC
Posted by Thomas Huth 11 months, 1 week ago
Am Wed, 20 Dec 2023 19:36:27 +0000
schrieb Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk>:

> On 20/12/2023 19:20, Thomas Huth wrote:
> 
> > Am Wed, 20 Dec 2023 13:16:38 +0000
> > schrieb Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk>:
> >   
> >> Move the old_scr2 variable to NeXTPC so that the old SCR2 register state is
> >> stored along with the current SCR2 state.
> >>
> >> Since the SCR2 register is 32-bits wide, convert old_scr2 to uint32_t and
> >> update the SCR2 register access code to allow unaligned writes.
> >>
> >> Note that this is a migration break, but as nothing will currently boot then
> >> we do not need to worry about this now.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayland@ilande.co.uk>
> >> ---
> >>   hw/m68k/next-cube.c | 12 +++++++++---
> >>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/hw/m68k/next-cube.c b/hw/m68k/next-cube.c
> >> index f2222554fa..d53f73fb8b 100644
> >> --- a/hw/m68k/next-cube.c
> >> +++ b/hw/m68k/next-cube.c
> >> @@ -91,6 +91,7 @@ struct NeXTPC {
> >>   
> >>       uint32_t scr1;
> >>       uint32_t scr2;
> >> +    uint32_t old_scr2;
> >>       uint32_t int_mask;
> >>       uint32_t int_status;
> >>       uint32_t led;
> >> @@ -125,8 +126,7 @@ static const uint8_t rtc_ram2[32] = {
> >>   
> >>   static void nextscr2_write(NeXTPC *s, uint32_t val, int size)
> >>   {
> >> -    static uint8_t old_scr2;
> >> -    uint8_t scr2_2;
> >> +    uint8_t old_scr2, scr2_2;
> >>       NextRtc *rtc = &s->rtc;
> >>   
> >>       if (size == 4) {
> >> @@ -144,6 +144,8 @@ static void nextscr2_write(NeXTPC *s, uint32_t val, int size)
> >>           }
> >>       }
> >>   
> >> +    old_scr2 = (s->old_scr2 >> 8) & 0xff;
> >> +
> >>       if (scr2_2 & 0x1) {
> >>           /* DPRINTF("RTC %x phase %i\n", scr2_2, rtc->phase); */
> >>           if (rtc->phase == -1) {
> >> @@ -252,7 +254,6 @@ static void nextscr2_write(NeXTPC *s, uint32_t val, int size)
> >>       }
> >>       s->scr2 = val & 0xFFFF00FF;
> >>       s->scr2 |= scr2_2 << 8;  
> > 
> > So s->scr2 is updated with the "val" at the end of nextscr2_write() ...
> >   
> >> -    old_scr2 = scr2_2;
> >>   }
> >>   
> >>   static uint64_t next_mmio_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsigned size)
> >> @@ -318,7 +319,10 @@ static void next_mmio_write(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t val,
> >>           break;
> >>   
> >>       case 0xd000 ... 0xd003:
> >> +        s->scr2 = deposit32(s->scr2, (4 - (addr - 0xd000) - size) << 3,
> >> +                            size << 3, val);  
> > 
> > ... but here it is also updated before nextscr2_write() ? Looks somewhat
> > strange. Though I have to admit that I don't fully understand the logic
> > here anyway... Maybe we could peek at Previous to see how this register is
> > supposed to behave?  
> 
> I'm fairly sure what's supposed to happen is that bits 8-15 of SCR2 are used to 
> bit-bang the RTC and all the other values are preserved, hence the logic at the end 
> of nextscr2_write(). What makes it slightly more confusing is that scr2_2 and 
> old_scr2 in the current version of nextscr2_write() represent just bits 8-15 of SCR2 
> and not the entire register.
> 
> This is something I tried to improve in the following 2 commits by splitting out the 
> LED logic into its own function, and then finally updating old_scr2 to a 32-bit value 
> to match scr2 and using extract32()/deposit32() in next_scr2_rtc_update() to make 
> this process clearer.

Ok, thanks, it makes sense to me now. I also looked at the Previous
handlers for these registers, and it also seems like they treat the four
bytes of the register independently there. So with the following two
patches, I think this is a valid clean up.

Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <huth@tuxfamily.org>