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, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 729A9C433E0 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 21:54:58 +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 0238523435 for ; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 21:54:57 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 0238523435 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=kaod.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:56060 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxdFA-0005sr-NF for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Thu, 07 Jan 2021 16:54:56 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40146) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxdEU-0005Dt-NX; Thu, 07 Jan 2021 16:54:14 -0500 Received: from smtpout1.mo529.mail-out.ovh.net ([178.32.125.2]:47505) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kxdES-00025n-9p; Thu, 07 Jan 2021 16:54:14 -0500 Received: from mxplan5.mail.ovh.net (unknown [10.108.16.148]) by mo529.mail-out.ovh.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DDCD779ACA30; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 22:54:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from kaod.org (37.59.142.106) by DAG4EX1.mxp5.local (172.16.2.31) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2044.4; Thu, 7 Jan 2021 22:54:06 +0100 Authentication-Results: garm.ovh; auth=pass (GARM-106R006a612f5fa-4629-47c8-9583-6cd833526e74, 0E3940376814BA772487E0EA7B8E742872013C52) smtp.auth=clg@kaod.org X-OVh-ClientIp: 82.64.250.170 Subject: Re: What's the correct way to implement rfi and related instruction. To: , qemu-level , , David Gibson , Thomas Monjalon , , Aurelien Jarno References: From: =?UTF-8?Q?C=c3=a9dric_Le_Goater?= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2021 22:54:04 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [37.59.142.106] X-ClientProxiedBy: DAG3EX2.mxp5.local (172.16.2.22) To DAG4EX1.mxp5.local (172.16.2.31) X-Ovh-Tracer-GUID: d9b18162-fc17-43e4-ba9e-850636e5e120 X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 9438981871420214121 X-VR-SPAMSTATE: OK X-VR-SPAMSCORE: -100 X-VR-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedrvdegfedgvddtucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuqfggjfdpvefjgfevmfevgfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecuhedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhepuffvfhfhkffffgggjggtgfhisehtkeertddtfeejnecuhfhrohhmpeevrogurhhitggpnfgvpgfiohgrthgvrhcuoegtlhhgsehkrghougdrohhrgheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepfeejtdffhefggfejgfdthfeivdfgueffgffgheduheekffeiteeuvdeghfefiedvnecuffhomhgrihhnpehgnhhurdhorhhgnecukfhppedtrddtrddtrddtpdefjedrheelrddugedvrddutdeinecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmohguvgepshhmthhpqdhouhhtpdhhvghlohepmhigphhlrghnhedrmhgrihhlrdhovhhhrdhnvghtpdhinhgvtheptddrtddrtddrtddpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegtlhhgsehkrghougdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopehluhhohihonhhgghgrnhhgsehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhm Received-SPF: pass client-ip=178.32.125.2; envelope-from=clg@kaod.org; helo=smtpout1.mo529.mail-out.ovh.net X-Spam_score_int: -21 X-Spam_score: -2.2 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.267, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, 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: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 1/7/21 8:14 PM, 罗勇刚(Yonggang Luo) wrote: > This is the first patch,: > It's store MSR bits differntly for different rfi instructions: > [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] target-ppc: fix RFI by clearing some bits of MSR > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2010-05/msg02999.html > Comes from  target-ppc: fix RFI by clearing some bits of MSR > SHA-1: c3d420ead1aee9fcfd12be11cbdf6b1620134773 >  target-ppc/op_helper.c | 6 +++--- >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > ``` > diff --git a/target-ppc/op_helper.c b/target-ppc/op_helper.c > index 8f2ee986bb..3c3aa60bc3 100644 > --- a/target-ppc/op_helper.c > +++ b/target-ppc/op_helper.c > @@ -1646,20 +1646,20 @@ static inline void do_rfi(target_ulong nip, target_ulong msr, >  void helper_rfi (void) >  { >      do_rfi(env->spr[SPR_SRR0], env->spr[SPR_SRR1], > -           ~((target_ulong)0x0), 1); > +           ~((target_ulong)0x783F0000), 1); >  } >   >  #if defined(TARGET_PPC64) >  void helper_rfid (void) >  { >      do_rfi(env->spr[SPR_SRR0], env->spr[SPR_SRR1], > -           ~((target_ulong)0x0), 0); > +           ~((target_ulong)0x783F0000), 0); >  } >   >  void helper_hrfid (void) >  { >      do_rfi(env->spr[SPR_HSRR0], env->spr[SPR_HSRR1], > -           ~((target_ulong)0x0), 0); > +           ~((target_ulong)0x783F0000), 0); >  } >  #endif >  #endif > ``` > > This is the second patch,: > it's remove the parameter  `target_ulong msrm, int keep_msrh` > Comes from ppc: Fix rfi/rfid/hrfi/... emulation > SHA-1: a2e71b28e832346409efc795ecd1f0a2bcb705a3 > ``` >  target-ppc/excp_helper.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++----------------------------- >  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/target-ppc/excp_helper.c b/target-ppc/excp_helper.c > index 30e960e30b..aa0b63f4b0 100644 > --- a/target-ppc/excp_helper.c > +++ b/target-ppc/excp_helper.c > @@ -922,25 +922,20 @@ void helper_store_msr(CPUPPCState *env, target_ulong val) >      } >  } >   > -static inline void do_rfi(CPUPPCState *env, target_ulong nip, target_ulong msr, > -                          target_ulong msrm, int keep_msrh) > +static inline void do_rfi(CPUPPCState *env, target_ulong nip, target_ulong msr) >  { >      CPUState *cs = CPU(ppc_env_get_cpu(env)); >   > +    /* MSR:POW cannot be set by any form of rfi */ > +    msr &= ~(1ULL << MSR_POW); > + >  #if defined(TARGET_PPC64) > -    if (msr_is_64bit(env, msr)) { > -        nip = (uint64_t)nip; > -        msr &= (uint64_t)msrm; > -    } else { > +    /* Switching to 32-bit ? Crop the nip */ > +    if (!msr_is_64bit(env, msr)) { >          nip = (uint32_t)nip; > -        msr = (uint32_t)(msr & msrm); > -        if (keep_msrh) { > -            msr |= env->msr & ~((uint64_t)0xFFFFFFFF); > -        } >      } >  #else >      nip = (uint32_t)nip; > -    msr &= (uint32_t)msrm; >  #endif >      /* XXX: beware: this is false if VLE is supported */ >      env->nip = nip & ~((target_ulong)0x00000003); > @@ -959,26 +954,24 @@ static inline void do_rfi(CPUPPCState *env, target_ulong nip, target_ulong msr, >   >  void helper_rfi(CPUPPCState *env) >  { > -    if (env->excp_model == POWERPC_EXCP_BOOKE) { > -        do_rfi(env, env->spr[SPR_SRR0], env->spr[SPR_SRR1], > -               ~((target_ulong)0), 0); > -    } else { > -        do_rfi(env, env->spr[SPR_SRR0], env->spr[SPR_SRR1], > -               ~((target_ulong)0x783F0000), 1); > -    } > +    do_rfi(env, env->spr[SPR_SRR0], env->spr[SPR_SRR1] & 0xfffffffful); >  } >   > +#define MSR_BOOK3S_MASK >  #if defined(TARGET_PPC64) >  void helper_rfid(CPUPPCState *env) >  { > -    do_rfi(env, env->spr[SPR_SRR0], env->spr[SPR_SRR1], > -           ~((target_ulong)0x783F0000), 0); > +    /* The architeture defines a number of rules for which bits > +     * can change but in practice, we handle this in hreg_store_msr() > +     * which will be called by do_rfi(), so there is no need to filter > +     * here > +     */ > +    do_rfi(env, env->spr[SPR_SRR0], env->spr[SPR_SRR1]); >  } >   >  void helper_hrfid(CPUPPCState *env) >  { > -    do_rfi(env, env->spr[SPR_HSRR0], env->spr[SPR_HSRR1], > -           ~((target_ulong)0x783F0000), 0); > +    do_rfi(env, env->spr[SPR_HSRR0], env->spr[SPR_HSRR1]); >  } >  #endif >   > @@ -986,28 +979,24 @@ void helper_hrfid(CPUPPCState *env) >  /* Embedded PowerPC specific helpers */ >  void helper_40x_rfci(CPUPPCState *env) >  { > -    do_rfi(env, env->spr[SPR_40x_SRR2], env->spr[SPR_40x_SRR3], > -           ~((target_ulong)0xFFFF0000), 0); > +    do_rfi(env, env->spr[SPR_40x_SRR2], env->spr[SPR_40x_SRR3]); >  } >   >  void helper_rfci(CPUPPCState *env) >  { > -    do_rfi(env, env->spr[SPR_BOOKE_CSRR0], env->spr[SPR_BOOKE_CSRR1], > -           ~((target_ulong)0), 0); > +    do_rfi(env, env->spr[SPR_BOOKE_CSRR0], env->spr[SPR_BOOKE_CSRR1]); >  } >   >  void helper_rfdi(CPUPPCState *env) >  { >      /* FIXME: choose CSRR1 or DSRR1 based on cpu type */ > -    do_rfi(env, env->spr[SPR_BOOKE_DSRR0], env->spr[SPR_BOOKE_DSRR1], > -           ~((target_ulong)0), 0); > +    do_rfi(env, env->spr[SPR_BOOKE_DSRR0], env->spr[SPR_BOOKE_DSRR1]); >  } >   >  void helper_rfmci(CPUPPCState *env) >  { >      /* FIXME: choose CSRR1 or MCSRR1 based on cpu type */ > -    do_rfi(env, env->spr[SPR_BOOKE_MCSRR0], env->spr[SPR_BOOKE_MCSRR1], > -           ~((target_ulong)0), 0); > +    do_rfi(env, env->spr[SPR_BOOKE_MCSRR0], env->spr[SPR_BOOKE_MCSRR1]); >  } >  #endif >   > @@ -1045,7 +1034,7 @@ void helper_td(CPUPPCState *env, target_ulong arg1, target_ulong arg2, >   >  void helper_rfsvc(CPUPPCState *env) >  { > -    do_rfi(env, env->lr, env->ctr, 0x0000FFFF, 0); > +    do_rfi(env, env->lr, env->ctr & 0x0000FFFF); >  } >   >  /* Embedded.Processor Control */ > ``` > > And of cause, the second patch fixes some problem, but also cause new problem, > how to implement these instruction properly? What are the new problems ? C. > > > > -- >          此致 > 礼 > 罗勇刚 > Yours >     sincerely, > Yonggang Luo