Updated description of rvfi_mem_rdata, rvfi_mem_exokay, rvfi_mem_memt… #954
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…ype and rvfi_mem_err. Signed-off-by: Oystein Knauserud <Oystein.Knauserud@silabs.com>
silabs-oysteink
added
the
Component:Doc
| +---------------------+---------+----------------+----------------+--------------------------------+ | ||
|
|
||
| ``rvfi_mem_rdata`` will report the read data for load instructions. In case of split misaligned transactions this read data is the combination of the two transfers. | ||
|
|
silabs-krdosvik
approved these changes
Sep 21, 2023
docs/user_manual/source/rvfi.rst
Outdated
| ``rvfi_mem_err`` indicates if a load, non-bufferable store or atomic instruction got a bus error. | ||
| ``rvfi_mem_exokay`` indicates the status of ``data_exokay_i`` for loads, non-bufferable stores and atomic instructions. For split transactions, ``rvfi_mem_exokay`` will only | ||
| be 1 if both transactions receive ``data_exokay_i == 1``. | ||
| ``rvfi_mem_err`` indicates if a load, non-bufferable store or atomic instruction got a bus error. :numref:`rvfi_mem_err encoding for different transaction types` shows how |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(Not important but)
Is it supposed to be illustrated like this in the text?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note sure about the github rendering, it shows up correctly when built to HTML at least
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see, looks good then.
| +---------------------+---------+----------------+----------------+--------------------------------+ | ||
| | Store | Yes | Yes | Yes | 0 | | ||
| +---------------------+---------+----------------+----------------+--------------------------------+ | ||
| | Store | Yes | Yes | No | data_err_i(2) | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As mentioned internally, in this case rvfi_mem_type is registrated as bufferable, and there is nothing indicating that the second obi transfer is non-bufferable. You could therefor not know if the rvfi_mem_err and rvfi_mem_exokay is "correct" or just tied off.
As we discussed this will be fixed later, but wanted to mention the seemingly problematic scenario.
Silabs-ArjanB
approved these changes
Sep 22, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
…ype and rvfi_mem_err.