target/arm/hvf/hvf.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
Commit a2260983c655 ("hvf: arm: Add support for GICv3") added GICv3 support
by implementing emulation for a few system registers. ICC_RPR_EL1 was
defined but not plugged in the sysreg handlers (for no good reason).
Fix it.
Signed-off-by: Zenghui Yu <zenghui.yu@linux.dev>
---
target/arm/hvf/hvf.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/target/arm/hvf/hvf.c b/target/arm/hvf/hvf.c
index 87e35c1b71..650b7f4256 100644
--- a/target/arm/hvf/hvf.c
+++ b/target/arm/hvf/hvf.c
@@ -1359,6 +1359,7 @@ static int hvf_sysreg_read(CPUState *cpu, uint32_t reg, uint64_t *val)
case SYSREG_ICC_IGRPEN0_EL1:
case SYSREG_ICC_IGRPEN1_EL1:
case SYSREG_ICC_PMR_EL1:
+ case SYSREG_ICC_RPR_EL1:
case SYSREG_ICC_SGI0R_EL1:
case SYSREG_ICC_SGI1R_EL1:
case SYSREG_ICC_SRE_EL1:
@@ -1673,6 +1674,7 @@ static int hvf_sysreg_write(CPUState *cpu, uint32_t reg, uint64_t val)
case SYSREG_ICC_IGRPEN0_EL1:
case SYSREG_ICC_IGRPEN1_EL1:
case SYSREG_ICC_PMR_EL1:
+ case SYSREG_ICC_RPR_EL1:
case SYSREG_ICC_SGI0R_EL1:
case SYSREG_ICC_SGI1R_EL1:
case SYSREG_ICC_SRE_EL1:
--
2.34.1
On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 at 13:21, Zenghui Yu <zenghui.yu@linux.dev> wrote: > > Commit a2260983c655 ("hvf: arm: Add support for GICv3") added GICv3 support > by implementing emulation for a few system registers. ICC_RPR_EL1 was > defined but not plugged in the sysreg handlers (for no good reason). > > Fix it. > > Signed-off-by: Zenghui Yu <zenghui.yu@linux.dev> > --- > target/arm/hvf/hvf.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/target/arm/hvf/hvf.c b/target/arm/hvf/hvf.c > index 87e35c1b71..650b7f4256 100644 > --- a/target/arm/hvf/hvf.c > +++ b/target/arm/hvf/hvf.c > @@ -1359,6 +1359,7 @@ static int hvf_sysreg_read(CPUState *cpu, uint32_t reg, uint64_t *val) > case SYSREG_ICC_IGRPEN0_EL1: > case SYSREG_ICC_IGRPEN1_EL1: > case SYSREG_ICC_PMR_EL1: > + case SYSREG_ICC_RPR_EL1: > case SYSREG_ICC_SGI0R_EL1: > case SYSREG_ICC_SGI1R_EL1: > case SYSREG_ICC_SRE_EL1: > @@ -1673,6 +1674,7 @@ static int hvf_sysreg_write(CPUState *cpu, uint32_t reg, uint64_t val) > case SYSREG_ICC_IGRPEN0_EL1: > case SYSREG_ICC_IGRPEN1_EL1: > case SYSREG_ICC_PMR_EL1: > + case SYSREG_ICC_RPR_EL1: > case SYSREG_ICC_SGI0R_EL1: > case SYSREG_ICC_SGI1R_EL1: > case SYSREG_ICC_SRE_EL1: ICC_RPR_EL1 is a read-only register. But hvf_sysreg_read_cp() and hvf_sysreg_write_cp() do not check the .access field of the ARMCPRegInfo to ensure that they forbid writes to registers that are marked with a .access field that says they're read-only (and ditto reads to write-only registers). So either we should not list ICC_RPR_EL1 in this list in hvf_sysreg_write(), or else we should add the .access checks to hvf_sysreg_read_cp() and hvf_sysreg_write_cp(). I would favour the second of those two options, because it's more robust and means we only need to care about the access permissions of a register in one place. Plus we already get this wrong for some registers: for instance ICC_SGI1R_EL1 is write-only but we will permit the guest to read it. So I suggest a 2-patch series: * patch 1: add the checks on .access to hvf_sysreg_read_cp() and hvf_sysreg_write_cp(): they need to call cp_access_ok() to check this * patch 2: can then be this patch without modification thanks -- PMM
On 2025/3/19 00:56, Peter Maydell wrote: > On Sat, 15 Mar 2025 at 13:21, Zenghui Yu <zenghui.yu@linux.dev> wrote: > > > > Commit a2260983c655 ("hvf: arm: Add support for GICv3") added GICv3 support > > by implementing emulation for a few system registers. ICC_RPR_EL1 was > > defined but not plugged in the sysreg handlers (for no good reason). > > > > Fix it. > > > > Signed-off-by: Zenghui Yu <zenghui.yu@linux.dev> > > --- > > target/arm/hvf/hvf.c | 2 ++ > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/target/arm/hvf/hvf.c b/target/arm/hvf/hvf.c > > index 87e35c1b71..650b7f4256 100644 > > --- a/target/arm/hvf/hvf.c > > +++ b/target/arm/hvf/hvf.c > > @@ -1359,6 +1359,7 @@ static int hvf_sysreg_read(CPUState *cpu, uint32_t reg, uint64_t *val) > > case SYSREG_ICC_IGRPEN0_EL1: > > case SYSREG_ICC_IGRPEN1_EL1: > > case SYSREG_ICC_PMR_EL1: > > + case SYSREG_ICC_RPR_EL1: > > case SYSREG_ICC_SGI0R_EL1: > > case SYSREG_ICC_SGI1R_EL1: > > case SYSREG_ICC_SRE_EL1: > > @@ -1673,6 +1674,7 @@ static int hvf_sysreg_write(CPUState *cpu, uint32_t reg, uint64_t val) > > case SYSREG_ICC_IGRPEN0_EL1: > > case SYSREG_ICC_IGRPEN1_EL1: > > case SYSREG_ICC_PMR_EL1: > > + case SYSREG_ICC_RPR_EL1: > > case SYSREG_ICC_SGI0R_EL1: > > case SYSREG_ICC_SGI1R_EL1: > > case SYSREG_ICC_SRE_EL1: > > ICC_RPR_EL1 is a read-only register. Yup! Writes to it should result in an UNDEFINED exception. I completely missed that point.. > But hvf_sysreg_read_cp() > and hvf_sysreg_write_cp() do not check the .access field of the > ARMCPRegInfo to ensure that they forbid writes to registers that > are marked with a .access field that says they're read-only > (and ditto reads to write-only registers). So either we should > not list ICC_RPR_EL1 in this list in hvf_sysreg_write(), or > else we should add the .access checks to hvf_sysreg_read_cp() > and hvf_sysreg_write_cp(). > > I would favour the second of those two options, because it's > more robust and means we only need to care about the access > permissions of a register in one place. Plus we already get > this wrong for some registers: for instance ICC_SGI1R_EL1 > is write-only but we will permit the guest to read it. > > So I suggest a 2-patch series: > * patch 1: add the checks on .access to hvf_sysreg_read_cp() > and hvf_sysreg_write_cp(): they need to call > cp_access_ok() to check this Thanks for your detailed suggestion Peter! I come up with something like diff --git a/target/arm/hvf/hvf.c b/target/arm/hvf/hvf.c index 650b7f4256..a7ca7975e0 100644 --- a/target/arm/hvf/hvf.c +++ b/target/arm/hvf/hvf.c @@ -1264,6 +1264,9 @@ static bool hvf_sysreg_read_cp(CPUState *cpu, uint32_t reg, uint64_t *val) ri = get_arm_cp_reginfo(arm_cpu->cp_regs, hvf_reg2cp_reg(reg)); if (ri) { + if (!cp_access_ok(arm_current_el(env), ri, true)) { + return false; + } if (ri->accessfn) { if (ri->accessfn(env, ri, true) != CP_ACCESS_OK) { return false; @@ -1545,6 +1548,9 @@ static bool hvf_sysreg_write_cp(CPUState *cpu, uint32_t reg, uint64_t val) ri = get_arm_cp_reginfo(arm_cpu->cp_regs, hvf_reg2cp_reg(reg)); if (ri) { + if (!cp_access_ok(arm_current_el(env), ri, false)) { + return false; + } if (ri->accessfn) { if (ri->accessfn(env, ri, false) != CP_ACCESS_OK) { return false; I'll do some tests before sending it out. Thanks, Zenghui
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.