From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN, FREEMAIL_FROM,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABAEBC433ED for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 04:18:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2554961057 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 04:18:30 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2554961057 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:49574 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lWtSX-0006TO-7v for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 00:18:29 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56462) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lWtRe-0005wd-1K; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 00:17:34 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-xd33.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::d33]:44821) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lWtRb-0002uW-SF; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 00:17:33 -0400 Received: by mail-io1-xd33.google.com with SMTP id p8so1525383iol.11; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 21:17:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=djs7x6dJqj53t2sbEOoQZH+WgUI363+nwuOPFtr3pZk=; b=Lp5gg1Z7c8vS7EuNu1GXHsKESi9eNAZHnmjjxritO8f33om2o/aKtlSQ0U7FULMOXR 78g9BSjnr+0oi8bMKmJK//YUYtN2I/wswCbcJzeMH/gyU8hCNXNDl//NS9t+S47qg/Yt i+xa/cTrBLZcqTwWirzKm5ZDohoH8ltOVXZqzW62VO/VA7AcK4rGgc2VUTOP4MdGGfs0 q8VKuCphQHF71B5+tBseDNm/W/ESP2UdHoqtU1psYeO55fTgoYM9yb/LAxdoE/SbiVu0 mGjgYkow/Q7Vbc3BlB17NnZy5A0zRuW5lYdxzpBn5pjyjqlu34Yb8lMZYTZjlqLajKj6 S7rg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=djs7x6dJqj53t2sbEOoQZH+WgUI363+nwuOPFtr3pZk=; b=pshXRKTVwvNRVC/KaEn+jBwoRUw15KF+pDQ4F6J6PROn1udghjXZv7Xt5MuaMod4Gh 16uDNCoeSrt+6BUsD4cq2EvRuRLdJJio7UQATZFVdsb3exFP4Hbmmi0x+8ks05WScoGo DcWFKbXaKwxzqnt/RvOmA9AHOyfyhkxiLjU/5Sk6zXaLg96uVwS9GKPkfGNZqYtiHGS3 dBGDC3Zu6vjWyWxOaB3Nb9M1/KQGgCsZnqTxxTdVI+MbN8lntEy6+uoDqD9/+dh5DjQG z0soUklZIPMU+rmDm5xQOaCUB6o7Zfy5gWR/uNDRt/HTNpgDiVH8trUcJMXcc0Bu1moc DxKQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531yH4P0ClHMfT5fNp7kn0CN7ttlVIyQ7yQShyNSn0CSYWYEw2go JFGxD8K9WCbGA3L+dPHZEkQ3Uulmoj4N/bYuUjo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyUDrSyAk/MVjEqm6CLkGRxOVyJLj1k7PTvhPhAKGU0pG5XV1Sbj6skoBKG6TawfE6Wlc+tZ5B+A+1qSTzR35E= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:878e:: with SMTP id f14mr1120081ion.176.1618460250309; Wed, 14 Apr 2021 21:17:30 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <616cef68b75ec06b77847203efaca16f7efaaf18.1618281655.git.alistair.francis@wdc.com> In-Reply-To: From: Alistair Francis Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 14:17:03 +1000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/8] target/riscv: Implementation of enhanced PMP (ePMP) To: Bin Meng Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::d33; envelope-from=alistair23@gmail.com; helo=mail-io1-xd33.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -17 X-Spam_score: -1.8 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "open list:RISC-V" , Palmer Dabbelt , Alistair Francis , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org Developers" Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 5:35 PM Bin Meng wrote: > > Hi Alistair, > > On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 10:42 AM Alistair Francis > wrote: > > > > From: Hou Weiying > > > > This commit adds support for ePMP v0.9.1. > > > > The ePMP spec can be found in: > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Mh_aiHYxemL0umN3GTTw8vsbmzHZ_nxZXgjgOUzbvc8 > > > > Signed-off-by: Hongzheng-Li > > Signed-off-by: Hou Weiying > > Signed-off-by: Myriad-Dreamin > > Message-Id: > > [ Changes by AF: > > - Rebase on master > > - Update to latest spec > > - Use a switch case to handle ePMP MML permissions > > - Fix a few bugs > > ] > > Signed-off-by: Alistair Francis > > --- > > target/riscv/pmp.c | 164 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > > 1 file changed, 152 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/target/riscv/pmp.c b/target/riscv/pmp.c > > index e35988eec2..00f91d074f 100644 > > --- a/target/riscv/pmp.c > > +++ b/target/riscv/pmp.c > > @@ -90,11 +90,42 @@ static inline uint8_t pmp_read_cfg(CPURISCVState *env, uint32_t pmp_index) > > static void pmp_write_cfg(CPURISCVState *env, uint32_t pmp_index, uint8_t val) > > { > > if (pmp_index < MAX_RISCV_PMPS) { > > - if (!pmp_is_locked(env, pmp_index)) { > > - env->pmp_state.pmp[pmp_index].cfg_reg = val; > > - pmp_update_rule(env, pmp_index); > > + bool locked = true; > > + > > + if (riscv_feature(env, RISCV_FEATURE_EPMP)) { > > + /* mseccfg.RLB is set */ > > + if (MSECCFG_RLB_ISSET(env)) { > > + locked = false; > > + } > > + > > + /* mseccfg.MML is not set */ > > + if (!MSECCFG_MML_ISSET(env) && !pmp_is_locked(env, pmp_index)) { > > + locked = false; > > + } > > + > > + /* mseccfg.MML is set */ > > + if (MSECCFG_MML_ISSET(env)) { > > + /* not adding execute bit */ > > + if ((val & PMP_LOCK) != 0 && (val & PMP_EXEC) != PMP_EXEC) { > > + locked = false; > > + } > > + /* shared region and not adding X bit */ > > + if ((val & PMP_LOCK) != PMP_LOCK && > > + (val & 0x7) != (PMP_WRITE | PMP_EXEC)) { > > + locked = false; > > + } > > + } > > } else { > > + if (!pmp_is_locked(env, pmp_index)) { > > + locked = false; > > + } > > + } > > + > > + if (locked) { > > qemu_log_mask(LOG_GUEST_ERROR, "ignoring pmpcfg write - locked\n"); > > + } else { > > + env->pmp_state.pmp[pmp_index].cfg_reg = val; > > + pmp_update_rule(env, pmp_index); > > } > > } else { > > qemu_log_mask(LOG_GUEST_ERROR, > > @@ -217,6 +248,32 @@ static bool pmp_hart_has_privs_default(CPURISCVState *env, target_ulong addr, > > { > > bool ret; > > > > + if (riscv_feature(env, RISCV_FEATURE_EPMP)) { > > + if (MSECCFG_MMWP_ISSET(env)) { > > + /* > > + * The Machine Mode Whitelist Policy (mseccfg.MMWP) is set > > + * so we default to deny all, even for M-mode. > > + */ > > + *allowed_privs = 0; > > + return false; > > + } else if (MSECCFG_MML_ISSET(env)) { > > + /* > > + * The Machine Mode Lockdown (mseccfg.MML) bit is set > > + * so we can only execute code in M-mode with an applicable > > + * rule. Other modes are disabled. > > + */ > > + if (mode == PRV_M && !(privs & PMP_EXEC)) { > > + ret = true; > > + *allowed_privs = PMP_READ | PMP_WRITE; > > + } else { > > + ret = false; > > + *allowed_privs = 0; > > + } > > + > > + return ret; > > + } > > + } > > + > > if ((!riscv_feature(env, RISCV_FEATURE_PMP)) || (mode == PRV_M)) { > > /* > > * Privileged spec v1.10 states if HW doesn't implement any PMP entry > > @@ -294,13 +351,94 @@ bool pmp_hart_has_privs(CPURISCVState *env, target_ulong addr, > > pmp_get_a_field(env->pmp_state.pmp[i].cfg_reg); > > > > /* > > - * If the PMP entry is not off and the address is in range, do the priv > > - * check > > + * Convert the PMP permissions to match the truth table in the > > + * ePMP spec. > > */ > > + const uint8_t epmp_operation = > > + ((env->pmp_state.pmp[i].cfg_reg & PMP_LOCK) >> 4) | > > + ((env->pmp_state.pmp[i].cfg_reg & PMP_READ) << 2) | > > + (env->pmp_state.pmp[i].cfg_reg & PMP_WRITE) | > > + ((env->pmp_state.pmp[i].cfg_reg & PMP_EXEC) >> 2); > > + > > if (((s + e) == 2) && (PMP_AMATCH_OFF != a_field)) { > > - *allowed_privs = PMP_READ | PMP_WRITE | PMP_EXEC; > > - if ((mode != PRV_M) || pmp_is_locked(env, i)) { > > - *allowed_privs &= env->pmp_state.pmp[i].cfg_reg; > > + /* > > + * If the PMP entry is not off and the address is in range, > > + * do the priv check > > + */ > > + if (!MSECCFG_MML_ISSET(env)) { > > + /* > > + * If mseccfg.MML Bit is not set, do pmp priv check > > + * This will always apply to regular PMP. > > + */ > > + *allowed_privs = PMP_READ | PMP_WRITE | PMP_EXEC; > > + if ((mode != PRV_M) || pmp_is_locked(env, i)) { > > + *allowed_privs &= env->pmp_state.pmp[i].cfg_reg; > > + } > > + } else { > > + /* > > + * If mseccfg.MML Bit set, do the enhanced pmp priv check > > + */ > > + if (mode == PRV_M) { > > + switch (epmp_operation) { > > + case 0: > > + case 1: > > + case 4: > > + case 5: > > + case 6: > > + case 7: > > + case 8: > > + *allowed_privs = 0; > > + break; > > + case 2: > > + case 3: > > + case 14: > > + *allowed_privs = PMP_READ | PMP_WRITE; > > + break; > > + case 9: > > + case 10: > > + *allowed_privs = PMP_EXEC; > > + break; > > + case 11: > > + case 13: > > + *allowed_privs = PMP_READ | PMP_EXEC; > > + break; > > + case 12: > > + case 15: > > + *allowed_privs = PMP_READ; > > + break; > > + } > > + } else { > > + switch (epmp_operation) { > > + case 0: > > + case 8: > > + case 9: > > + case 12: > > + case 13: > > + case 14: > > + *allowed_privs = 0; > > + break; > > + case 1: > > + case 10: > > + case 11: > > + *allowed_privs = PMP_EXEC; > > + break; > > + case 2: > > + case 4: > > + case 15: > > + *allowed_privs = PMP_READ; > > + break; > > + case 3: > > + case 6: > > + *allowed_privs = PMP_READ | PMP_WRITE; > > + break; > > + case 5: > > + *allowed_privs = PMP_READ | PMP_EXEC; > > + break; > > + case 7: > > + *allowed_privs = PMP_READ | PMP_WRITE | PMP_EXEC; > > + break; > > + } > > + } > > } > > > > ret = ((privs & *allowed_privs) == privs); > > @@ -328,10 +466,12 @@ void pmpcfg_csr_write(CPURISCVState *env, uint32_t reg_index, > > > > trace_pmpcfg_csr_write(env->mhartid, reg_index, val); > > > > - if ((reg_index & 1) && (sizeof(target_ulong) == 8)) { > > - qemu_log_mask(LOG_GUEST_ERROR, > > - "ignoring pmpcfg write - incorrect address\n"); > > - return; > > + if (!riscv_feature(env, RISCV_FEATURE_EPMP) || !MSECCFG_RLB_ISSET(env)) { > > + if ((reg_index & 1) && (sizeof(target_ulong) == 8)) { > > + qemu_log_mask(LOG_GUEST_ERROR, > > + "ignoring pmpcfg write - PMP config is locked\n"); > > I think the original log message was for checking register address for > RV64, and should still retain. We should add another branch with a > different log message for the new ePMP check. This whole change is actually wrong. I have removed this entire chunk. Alistair > > > + return; > > + } > > Regards, > Bin