| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|---|
|
This script was used to do the modification:
```
from pathlib import Path
import re
RE_LINE = r"/\*={50,150}\*/\n"
RE_MIDDLE = r"/\*.*\*/\n"
NEW_TEXT = """/*=======================================================================================*/
/* This Sail RISC-V architecture model, comprising all files and */
/* directories except where otherwise noted is subject the BSD */
/* two-clause license in the LICENSE file. */
/* */
/* SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-2-Clause */
/*=======================================================================================*/
"""
REPLACEMENT = re.compile(rf"^{RE_LINE}(?:{RE_MIDDLE}){{10,100}}{RE_LINE}")
def main():
for file in Path("model").glob("**/*.sail"):
text = file.read_text(encoding="utf-8")
text = REPLACEMENT.sub(NEW_TEXT, text, 1)
file.write_text(text, encoding="utf-8")
if __name__ == "__main__":
main()
```
|
|
Use newer bitfield syntax, which has been part of Sail for
a while now. Should in theory be more efficient as it removes
a level of indirection for bitfield accesses.
It's also much more friendly to `sail -fmt`, which has no idea
how to handle the old bitfield syntax.
|
|
Rename EXTZ to zero_extend and EXTS to sign_extend. Two main reasons
for doing this - it means that the source more closely follows the
descriptions in the documentation with more readable names, and EXTS
and EXTZ are visually very close to each other with just the S and Z.
They are also following an odd convention where they are ALLCAPS rather
than snake_case like other functions in the spec.
I think this convention comes from early Power specs in Sail, which
influenced Sail MIPS and CHERI-MIPS, but I don't think it's a very
good convention we should be keeping in sail-riscv
|
|
|
|
This may be more readable and also matches the sail-cheri-riscv model.
For now this keeps ~ overloaded to accept bool, but in the future we may
want to consider removing it (which is what I did to find all uses
modified in this patch)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is not a finalized trace format yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
not what is in the PC register because the architectural PC is the offset of PCC and the PC register stores the absolute PC (at present -- may review this decision in future). This allows fix for AUIPC and RVFI reported PC.
|
|
rvfi-dii comparisons where upper bits are not expected to have information in them)
|
|
|
|
|
