On 7/29/21 8:05 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 7/29/21 3:44 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: >> On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 01:51, Richard Henderson >> <richard.hender...@linaro.org> wrote: >>> >>> We ought to have been recording the virtual address for reporting >>> to the guest trap handler. >>> >>> Cc: qemu-...@nongnu.org >>> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org> >>> --- >>> target/ppc/excp_helper.c | 2 ++ >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/target/ppc/excp_helper.c b/target/ppc/excp_helper.c >>> index a79a0ed465..0b2c6de442 100644 >>> --- a/target/ppc/excp_helper.c >>> +++ b/target/ppc/excp_helper.c >>> @@ -1503,6 +1503,8 @@ void ppc_cpu_do_unaligned_access(CPUState *cs, vaddr >>> vaddr, >>> CPUPPCState *env = cs->env_ptr; >>> uint32_t insn; >>> >>> + env->spr[SPR_DAR] = vaddr; >>> + >> >> Is this the right SPR for all PPC variants? For instance the >> kernel's code in arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64e.S looks >> in SPRN_DEAR, which is our SPR_BOOKE_DEAR or SPR_40x_DEAR.
Indeed :/ > I have no idea. I glanced through a handful of the mmu's, and looked at the > current BookS docs, but that's certainly not all. I took a look at some more and for instance, e300 uses DAR and e500, 405, 476 use DEAR. DAR should be consistent over the server processors. C. > > I'll note that if we do need to set different regs for different mmus, we'll > probably want to standardize on this one for user-only, like we did for the > user-only copy of ppc_cpu_tlb_fill. > > > r~ >
