target/arm/whpx/whpx-all.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
In whpx_get_registers and whpx_set_registers the loops over FP registers
were using whpx_reg_match[i].reg instead of whpx_fpreg_match[i].reg
Signed-off-by: Osama Abdelkader <osama.abdelkader@gmail.com>
---
target/arm/whpx/whpx-all.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/target/arm/whpx/whpx-all.c b/target/arm/whpx/whpx-all.c
index b0602266af..40ada2d5b6 100644
--- a/target/arm/whpx/whpx-all.c
+++ b/target/arm/whpx/whpx-all.c
@@ -554,7 +554,7 @@ void whpx_get_registers(CPUState *cpu)
}
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(whpx_fpreg_match); i++) {
- whpx_get_reg(cpu, whpx_reg_match[i].reg, &val);
+ whpx_get_reg(cpu, whpx_fpreg_match[i].reg, &val);
memcpy((char *)env + whpx_fpreg_match[i].offset, &val, sizeof(val.Reg128));
}
@@ -605,7 +605,7 @@ void whpx_set_registers(CPUState *cpu, int level)
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(whpx_fpreg_match); i++) {
memcpy(&val.Reg128, (char *)env + whpx_fpreg_match[i].offset, sizeof(val.Reg128));
- whpx_set_reg(cpu, whpx_reg_match[i].reg, val);
+ whpx_set_reg(cpu, whpx_fpreg_match[i].reg, val);
}
clean_whv_register_value(&val);
--
2.43.0
On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 at 21:08, Osama Abdelkader <osama.abdelkader@gmail.com> wrote: > > In whpx_get_registers and whpx_set_registers the loops over FP registers > were using whpx_reg_match[i].reg instead of whpx_fpreg_match[i].reg > > Signed-off-by: Osama Abdelkader <osama.abdelkader@gmail.com> > --- > target/arm/whpx/whpx-all.c | 4 ++-- Applied to target-arm.next, thanks. -- PMM
On 17/2/26 22:08, Osama Abdelkader wrote: > In whpx_get_registers and whpx_set_registers the loops over FP registers > were using whpx_reg_match[i].reg instead of whpx_fpreg_match[i].reg > > Signed-off-by: Osama Abdelkader <osama.abdelkader@gmail.com> > --- > target/arm/whpx/whpx-all.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
> On 17. Feb 2026, at 22:08, Osama Abdelkader <osama.abdelkader@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> In whpx_get_registers and whpx_set_registers the loops over FP registers
> were using whpx_reg_match[i].reg instead of whpx_fpreg_match[i].reg
>
> Signed-off-by: Osama Abdelkader <osama.abdelkader@gmail.com>
> ---
Reviewed-by: Mohamed Mediouni <mohamed@unpredictable.fr <mailto:mohamed@unpredictable.fr>>
Thank you,
> target/arm/whpx/whpx-all.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/target/arm/whpx/whpx-all.c b/target/arm/whpx/whpx-all.c
> index b0602266af..40ada2d5b6 100644
> --- a/target/arm/whpx/whpx-all.c
> +++ b/target/arm/whpx/whpx-all.c
> @@ -554,7 +554,7 @@ void whpx_get_registers(CPUState *cpu)
> }
>
> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(whpx_fpreg_match); i++) {
> - whpx_get_reg(cpu, whpx_reg_match[i].reg, &val);
> + whpx_get_reg(cpu, whpx_fpreg_match[i].reg, &val);
> memcpy((char *)env + whpx_fpreg_match[i].offset, &val, sizeof(val.Reg128));
> }
>
> @@ -605,7 +605,7 @@ void whpx_set_registers(CPUState *cpu, int level)
>
> for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(whpx_fpreg_match); i++) {
> memcpy(&val.Reg128, (char *)env + whpx_fpreg_match[i].offset, sizeof(val.Reg128));
> - whpx_set_reg(cpu, whpx_reg_match[i].reg, val);
> + whpx_set_reg(cpu, whpx_fpreg_match[i].reg, val);
> }
>
> clean_whv_register_value(&val);
> --
> 2.43.0
>
© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.