On 2023/2/15 10:22, Bin Meng wrote:
On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 10:59 PM weiwei <liwei...@iscas.ac.cn> wrote:
On 2023/2/14 22:27, Bin Meng wrote:
At present the envcfg CSRs predicate() routines are generic one like
smode(), hmode. The configuration check is done in the read / write
routine. Create a new predicate routine to cover such check, so that
gdbstub can correctly report its existence.
Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bm...@tinylab.org>
---
target/riscv/csr.c | 98 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
1 file changed, 61 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
diff --git a/target/riscv/csr.c b/target/riscv/csr.c
index 37350b8a6d..284ccc09dd 100644
--- a/target/riscv/csr.c
+++ b/target/riscv/csr.c
@@ -41,40 +41,6 @@ void riscv_set_csr_ops(int csrno, riscv_csr_operations *ops)
}
/* Predicates */
-#if !defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY)
-static RISCVException smstateen_acc_ok(CPURISCVState *env, int index,
- uint64_t bit)
-{
- bool virt = riscv_cpu_virt_enabled(env);
- RISCVCPU *cpu = env_archcpu(env);
-
- if (env->priv == PRV_M || !cpu->cfg.ext_smstateen) {
- return RISCV_EXCP_NONE;
- }
-
- if (!(env->mstateen[index] & bit)) {
- return RISCV_EXCP_ILLEGAL_INST;
- }
-
- if (virt) {
- if (!(env->hstateen[index] & bit)) {
- return RISCV_EXCP_VIRT_INSTRUCTION_FAULT;
- }
-
- if (env->priv == PRV_U && !(env->sstateen[index] & bit)) {
- return RISCV_EXCP_VIRT_INSTRUCTION_FAULT;
- }
- }
-
- if (env->priv == PRV_U && riscv_has_ext(env, RVS)) {
- if (!(env->sstateen[index] & bit)) {
- return RISCV_EXCP_ILLEGAL_INST;
- }
- }
-
- return RISCV_EXCP_NONE;
-}
-#endif
static RISCVException fs(CPURISCVState *env, int csrno)
{
@@ -318,6 +284,32 @@ static RISCVException umode32(CPURISCVState *env, int
csrno)
return umode(env, csrno);
}
+static RISCVException envcfg(CPURISCVState *env, int csrno)
+{
+ RISCVCPU *cpu = env_archcpu(env);
+ riscv_csr_predicate_fn predicate;
+
+ if (cpu->cfg.ext_smstateen) {
+ return RISCV_EXCP_ILLEGAL_INST;
+ }
This check seems not right here. Why ILLEGAL_INST is directly
triggered if smstateen is enabled?
This logic was there in the original codes. I was confused when I
looked at this as well.
Sorry, I didn't find the original codes. Do you mean this:
if (env->priv == PRV_M || !cpu->cfg.ext_smstateen) {
return RISCV_EXCP_NONE;
}
If so, I think the check here is to make the following *stateen related
check ignored when smstateen extension is disabled.
Regards,
Weiwei Li
Anyway, if it is an issue, it should be a separate patch.
It seems that smstateen related check will be done for
senvcfg/henvcfg{h} when smstateen is enabled.
Regards,
Bin