On 11/19/20 3:56 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: > In commit 077d7449100d824a4 we added code to handle the v8M > requirement that returns from NMI or HardFault forcibly deactivate > those exceptions regardless of what interrupt the guest is trying to > deactivate. Unfortunately this broke the handling of the "illegal > exception return because the returning exception number is not > active" check for those cases. In the pseudocode this test is done > on the exception the guest asks to return from, but because our > implementation was doing this in armv7m_nvic_complete_irq() after the > new "deactivate NMI/HardFault regardless" code we ended up doing the > test on the VecInfo for that exception instead, which usually meant > failing to raise the illegal exception return fault. > > In the case for "configurable exception targeting the opposite > security state" we detected the illegal-return case but went ahead > and deactivated the VecInfo anyway, which is wrong because that is > the VecInfo for the other security state. > > Rearrange the code so that we first identify the illegal return > cases, then see if we really need to deactivate NMI or HardFault > instead, and finally do the deactivation. > > Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> > --- > hw/intc/armv7m_nvic.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- > 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
Reviewed-by: Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org> r~
