On 9/13/19 9:26 AM, Luc Michel wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On 9/12/19 6:03 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 at 12:01, Luc Michel <luc.mic...@greensocs.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> For AArch64 CPUs with a CBAR register, we have two views for it:
>>> - in AArch64 state, the CBAR_EL1 register (S3_1_C15_C3_0), returns the
>>> full 64 bits CBAR value
>>> - in AArch32 state, the CBAR register (cp15, opc1=1, CRn=15, CRm=3,
>>> opc2=0)
>>> returns a 32 bits view such that:
>>> CBAR = CBAR_EL1[31:18] 0..0 CBAR_EL1[43:32]
>>>
>>> This commit fixes the current implementation where:
>>> - CBAR_EL1 was returning the 32 bits view instead of the full 64 bits
>>> value,
>>> - CBAR was returning a truncated 32 bits version of the full 64 bits
>>> one, instead of the 32 bits view
>>> - CBAR was declared as cp15, opc1=4, CRn=15, CRm=0, opc2=0, which is
>>> the CBAR register found in the ARMv7 Cortex-Ax CPUs, but not in
>>> ARMv8 CPUs.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Luc Michel <luc.mic...@greensocs.com>
>>> ---
>>> target/arm/helper.c | 6 +++---
>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/target/arm/helper.c b/target/arm/helper.c
>>> index 507026c915..755aa18a2d 100644
>>> --- a/target/arm/helper.c
>>> +++ b/target/arm/helper.c
>>> @@ -6740,12 +6740,12 @@ void register_cp_regs_for_features(ARMCPU *cpu)
>>> ARMCPRegInfo cbar_reginfo[] = {
>>> { .name = "CBAR",
>>> .type = ARM_CP_CONST,
>>> - .cp = 15, .crn = 15, .crm = 0, .opc1 = 4, .opc2 = 0,
>>> - .access = PL1_R, .resetvalue = cpu->reset_cbar },
>>> + .cp = 15, .crn = 15, .crm = 3, .opc1 = 1, .opc2 = 0,
>>> + .access = PL1_R, .resetvalue = cbar32 },
>>
>> This will break the Cortex-A9 &c which use the 15/0/4/0 encoding
>> and the un-rearranged value for this register.
> I don't think so because we are in the "if (arm_feature(env,
> ARM_FEATURE_AARCH64))" branch of the code. The else branch still maps
> 15/0/4/0 for non-AArch64 CPUs.
>
>>
>> I think we need to check through the TRMs to confirm which CPUs use
>> which format for the CBAR, and have a different feature bit for the
>> newer format/sysreg encoding, so we can provide the right sysregs for
>> the right cores.
> I checked all the AArch64 Cortex's TRMs, for those having a PERIPHBASE
> signal and CBAR register (namely Cortex-A53, 57, 72, 73), they all match
> the mapping I put in this patch, so I think we don't need to split the
> CBAR feature further. I believe more recent Cortex's address the GIC
> using coprocessor registers, and CBAR does not exist in those ones.
Hi Peter,
Do you want me to re-roll this patch with some modifications?
Thanks.
--
Luc
