1. Patchew
  2. QEMU
  3. [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] RISC-V Smstateen support
  4. View patch

[RFC PATCH v2 2/4] target/riscv: smstateen check for h/senvcfg

Mayuresh Chitale posted 4 patches 3 years, 10 months ago
There is a newer version of this series
[RFC PATCH v2 2/4] target/riscv: smstateen check for h/senvcfg
Posted by Mayuresh Chitale 3 years, 10 months ago 
Accesses to henvcfg, henvcfgh and senvcfg are allowed
only if corresponding bit in mstateen0/hstateen0 is
enabled. Otherwise an illegal instruction trap is
generated.

Signed-off-by: Mayuresh Chitale <mchitale@ventanamicro.com>
---
 target/riscv/csr.c | 82 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 76 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/target/riscv/csr.c b/target/riscv/csr.c
index 215c8ecef1..2388f0226f 100644
--- a/target/riscv/csr.c
+++ b/target/riscv/csr.c
@@ -39,6 +39,35 @@ void riscv_set_csr_ops(int csrno, riscv_csr_operations *ops)
 }
 
 /* Predicates */
+static RISCVException smstateen_acc_ok(CPURISCVState *env, int mode, int bit)
+{
+    CPUState *cs = env_cpu(env);
+    RISCVCPU *cpu = RISCV_CPU(cs);
+    bool virt = riscv_cpu_virt_enabled(env);
+
+    if (!cpu->cfg.ext_smstateen) {
+        return RISCV_EXCP_NONE;
+    }
+
+    if (!(env->mstateen[0] & 1UL << bit)) {
+        return RISCV_EXCP_ILLEGAL_INST;
+    }
+
+    if (virt) {
+        if (!(env->hstateen[0] & 1UL << bit)) {
+            return RISCV_EXCP_VIRT_INSTRUCTION_FAULT;
+        }
+    }
+
+    if (mode == PRV_U) {
+        if (!(env->sstateen[0] & 1UL << bit)) {
+            return RISCV_EXCP_ILLEGAL_INST;
+        }
+    }
+
+    return RISCV_EXCP_NONE;
+}
+
 static RISCVException fs(CPURISCVState *env, int csrno)
 {
 #if !defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY)
@@ -1865,6 +1894,13 @@ static RISCVException write_menvcfgh(CPURISCVState *env, int csrno,
 static RISCVException read_senvcfg(CPURISCVState *env, int csrno,
                                  target_ulong *val)
 {
+    RISCVException ret;
+
+    ret = smstateen_acc_ok(env, PRV_S, SMSTATEEN0_HSENVCFG);
+    if (ret != RISCV_EXCP_NONE) {
+        return ret;
+    }
+
     *val = env->senvcfg;
     return RISCV_EXCP_NONE;
 }
@@ -1873,15 +1909,27 @@ static RISCVException write_senvcfg(CPURISCVState *env, int csrno,
                                   target_ulong val)
 {
     uint64_t mask = SENVCFG_FIOM | SENVCFG_CBIE | SENVCFG_CBCFE | SENVCFG_CBZE;
+    RISCVException ret;
 
-    env->senvcfg = (env->senvcfg & ~mask) | (val & mask);
+    ret = smstateen_acc_ok(env, PRV_S, SMSTATEEN0_HSENVCFG);
+    if (ret != RISCV_EXCP_NONE) {
+        return ret;
+    }
 
+    env->senvcfg = (env->senvcfg & ~mask) | (val & mask);
     return RISCV_EXCP_NONE;
 }
 
 static RISCVException read_henvcfg(CPURISCVState *env, int csrno,
                                  target_ulong *val)
 {
+    RISCVException ret;
+
+    ret = smstateen_acc_ok(env, PRV_S, SMSTATEEN0_HSENVCFG);
+    if (ret != RISCV_EXCP_NONE) {
+        return ret;
+    }
+
     *val = env->henvcfg;
     return RISCV_EXCP_NONE;
 }
@@ -1890,6 +1938,12 @@ static RISCVException write_henvcfg(CPURISCVState *env, int csrno,
                                   target_ulong val)
 {
     uint64_t mask = HENVCFG_FIOM | HENVCFG_CBIE | HENVCFG_CBCFE | HENVCFG_CBZE;
+    RISCVException ret;
+
+    ret = smstateen_acc_ok(env, PRV_S, SMSTATEEN0_HSENVCFG);
+    if (ret != RISCV_EXCP_NONE) {
+        return ret;
+    }
 
     if (riscv_cpu_mxl(env) == MXL_RV64) {
         mask |= HENVCFG_PBMTE | HENVCFG_STCE;
@@ -1903,6 +1957,13 @@ static RISCVException write_henvcfg(CPURISCVState *env, int csrno,
 static RISCVException read_henvcfgh(CPURISCVState *env, int csrno,
                                  target_ulong *val)
 {
+    RISCVException ret;
+
+    ret = smstateen_acc_ok(env, PRV_S, SMSTATEEN0_HSENVCFG);
+    if (ret != RISCV_EXCP_NONE) {
+        return ret;
+    }
+
     *val = env->henvcfg >> 32;
     return RISCV_EXCP_NONE;
 }
@@ -1912,9 +1973,14 @@ static RISCVException write_henvcfgh(CPURISCVState *env, int csrno,
 {
     uint64_t mask = HENVCFG_PBMTE | HENVCFG_STCE;
     uint64_t valh = (uint64_t)val << 32;
+    RISCVException ret;
 
-    env->henvcfg = (env->henvcfg & ~mask) | (valh & mask);
+    ret = smstateen_acc_ok(env, PRV_S, SMSTATEEN0_HSENVCFG);
+    if (ret != RISCV_EXCP_NONE) {
+        return ret;
+    }
 
+    env->henvcfg = (env->henvcfg & ~mask) | (valh & mask);
     return RISCV_EXCP_NONE;
 }
 
@@ -1936,7 +2002,8 @@ static RISCVException write_mstateen(CPURISCVState *env, int csrno,
                                   target_ulong new_val)
 {
     uint64_t *reg;
-    uint64_t wr_mask = 1UL << SMSTATEEN_STATEN;
+    uint64_t wr_mask = (1UL << SMSTATEEN_STATEN) |
+                       (1UL << SMSTATEEN0_HSENVCFG);
 
     reg = &env->mstateen[csrno - CSR_MSTATEEN0];
     write_smstateen(env, reg, wr_mask, new_val);
@@ -1957,7 +2024,8 @@ static RISCVException write_mstateenh(CPURISCVState *env, int csrno,
 {
     uint64_t *reg;
     uint64_t val;
-    uint64_t wr_mask = 1UL << SMSTATEEN_STATEN;
+    uint64_t wr_mask = (1UL << SMSTATEEN_STATEN) |
+                       (1UL << SMSTATEEN0_HSENVCFG);
 
     reg = &env->mstateen[csrno - CSR_MSTATEEN0H - 0x10];
     val = (uint64_t)new_val << 32;
@@ -1979,7 +2047,8 @@ static RISCVException write_hstateen(CPURISCVState *env, int csrno,
                                   target_ulong new_val)
 {
     uint64_t *reg;
-    uint64_t wr_mask = 1UL << SMSTATEEN_STATEN;
+    uint64_t wr_mask = (1UL << SMSTATEEN_STATEN) |
+                       (1UL << SMSTATEEN0_HSENVCFG);
     int index = csrno - CSR_HSTATEEN0;
 
     reg = &env->hstateen[index];
@@ -2002,8 +2071,9 @@ static RISCVException write_hstateenh(CPURISCVState *env, int csrno,
 {
     uint64_t *reg;
     uint64_t val;
-    uint64_t wr_mask = 1UL << SMSTATEEN_STATEN;
     int index = csrno - CSR_HSTATEEN0H - 0x10;
+    uint64_t wr_mask = (1UL << SMSTATEEN_STATEN) |
+                       (1UL << SMSTATEEN0_HSENVCFG);
 
     reg = &env->hstateen[index];
     val = (uint64_t)new_val << 32;
-- 
2.17.1
Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/4] target/riscv: smstateen check for h/senvcfg
Posted by Weiwei Li 3 years, 10 months ago 
在 2022/3/23 下午7:13, Mayuresh Chitale 写道:
> Accesses to henvcfg, henvcfgh and senvcfg are allowed
> only if corresponding bit in mstateen0/hstateen0 is
> enabled. Otherwise an illegal instruction trap is
> generated.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mayuresh Chitale <mchitale@ventanamicro.com>
> ---
>   target/riscv/csr.c | 82 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>   1 file changed, 76 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/target/riscv/csr.c b/target/riscv/csr.c
> index 215c8ecef1..2388f0226f 100644
> --- a/target/riscv/csr.c
> +++ b/target/riscv/csr.c
> @@ -39,6 +39,35 @@ void riscv_set_csr_ops(int csrno, riscv_csr_operations *ops)
>   }
>   
>   /* Predicates */
> +static RISCVException smstateen_acc_ok(CPURISCVState *env, int mode, int bit)
> +{
> +    CPUState *cs = env_cpu(env);
> +    RISCVCPU *cpu = RISCV_CPU(cs);
> +    bool virt = riscv_cpu_virt_enabled(env);
> +
> +    if (!cpu->cfg.ext_smstateen) {
> +        return RISCV_EXCP_NONE;
> +    }
> +
> +    if (!(env->mstateen[0] & 1UL << bit)) {
> +        return RISCV_EXCP_ILLEGAL_INST;
> +    }

I think here should be " & (1UL << bit) " . The same for following 
similar cases.

Regards,

Weiwei Li
Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/4] target/riscv: smstateen check for h/senvcfg
Posted by Mayuresh Chitale 3 years, 10 months ago 
On Wed, Mar 23, 2022 at 6:22 PM Weiwei Li <liweiwei@iscas.ac.cn> wrote:
>
>
> 在 2022/3/23 下午7:13, Mayuresh Chitale 写道:
> > Accesses to henvcfg, henvcfgh and senvcfg are allowed
> > only if corresponding bit in mstateen0/hstateen0 is
> > enabled. Otherwise an illegal instruction trap is
> > generated.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mayuresh Chitale <mchitale@ventanamicro.com>
> > ---
> >   target/riscv/csr.c | 82 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> >   1 file changed, 76 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/target/riscv/csr.c b/target/riscv/csr.c
> > index 215c8ecef1..2388f0226f 100644
> > --- a/target/riscv/csr.c
> > +++ b/target/riscv/csr.c
> > @@ -39,6 +39,35 @@ void riscv_set_csr_ops(int csrno, riscv_csr_operations *ops)
> >   }
> >
> >   /* Predicates */
> > +static RISCVException smstateen_acc_ok(CPURISCVState *env, int mode, int bit)
> > +{
> > +    CPUState *cs = env_cpu(env);
> > +    RISCVCPU *cpu = RISCV_CPU(cs);
> > +    bool virt = riscv_cpu_virt_enabled(env);
> > +
> > +    if (!cpu->cfg.ext_smstateen) {
> > +        return RISCV_EXCP_NONE;
> > +    }
> > +
> > +    if (!(env->mstateen[0] & 1UL << bit)) {
> > +        return RISCV_EXCP_ILLEGAL_INST;
> > +    }
>
> I think here should be " & (1UL << bit) " . The same for following
> similar cases.

Ok. Will fix it in the next version.
>
> Regards,
>
> Weiwei Li
>

Patchew 2.1-devel-b67e4c2

© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.