On 2021/11/10 下午7:11, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 11/10/21 8:04 AM, LIU Zhiwei wrote:
The mask comes from the pointer masking extension, or the max value
corresponding to XLEN bits.
Signed-off-by: LIU Zhiwei <zhiwei_...@c-sky.com>
---
target/riscv/cpu.c | 1 +
target/riscv/cpu.h | 4 ++++
target/riscv/cpu_helper.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
target/riscv/csr.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++
target/riscv/machine.c | 10 +++++++++
target/riscv/vector_helper.c | 23 +++++++++++++--------
6 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/target/riscv/cpu.c b/target/riscv/cpu.c
index 0d2d175fa2..886388f066 100644
--- a/target/riscv/cpu.c
+++ b/target/riscv/cpu.c
@@ -378,6 +378,7 @@ static void riscv_cpu_reset(DeviceState *dev)
#ifndef CONFIG_USER_ONLY
env->misa_mxl = env->misa_mxl_max;
env->priv = PRV_M;
+ riscv_cpu_update_mask(env);
env->mstatus &= ~(MSTATUS_MIE | MSTATUS_MPRV);
if (env->misa_mxl > MXL_RV32) {
/*
diff --git a/target/riscv/cpu.h b/target/riscv/cpu.h
index 11590a510e..73d7aa9ad7 100644
--- a/target/riscv/cpu.h
+++ b/target/riscv/cpu.h
@@ -252,6 +252,8 @@ struct CPURISCVState {
target_ulong upmmask;
target_ulong upmbase;
#endif
+ target_ulong mask;
+ target_ulong base;
I think the name here isn't great. Without the context of the
preceeding elements, the question becomes: mask of what?
Better might be cur_pmmask, cur_pmbase.
Broader than that, you're doing too many things in this patch. The
subject is "adjust vector address with mask", but you're also creating
new fields and updating them at priv changes, etc. Too much.
+void riscv_cpu_update_mask(CPURISCVState *env)
... update_pmmask?
+}
+
+
+
Watch the extra spaces.
@@ -1571,6 +1572,9 @@ static RISCVException
write_mpmmask(CPURISCVState *env, int csrno,
uint64_t mstatus;
env->mpmmask = val;
+ if ((env->priv == PRV_M) && (env->mmte & M_PM_ENABLE)) {
+ env->mask = val;
+ }
This needs to use the function; there are pieces missing here, notably
the zero-extend for RV32.
Zero-extend has been done automatically here, as these operations are in
csr instruction.
In my opinion, it is enough here to check env->priv and pm_enable.
I don't see any updates to the exception entry and exception return
paths.
Oops. I forgot this. We should update at these places. Exception entry
and exception return will call one same function
to change privilege, we can update it there.
You'll want to update the translator to use these new fields instead
of using the [msu]pmmask / [msu]pmbase fields directly. (Which means
that we will have fewer tcg variables, and need not copy the "current"
into DisasContext.)
Do you mean we can remove the global TCG variables pm_mask[] and pc_base[]?
If then how to transport env->cur_pmmask and env->cur_pmbase to
DisasContext?
Thanks,
Zhiwei
diff --git a/target/riscv/vector_helper.c b/target/riscv/vector_helper.c
index 60006b1b1b..0b297f6bc8 100644
--- a/target/riscv/vector_helper.c
+++ b/target/riscv/vector_helper.c
@@ -123,6 +123,11 @@ static inline uint32_t vext_maxsz(uint32_t desc)
return simd_maxsz(desc) << vext_lmul(desc);
}
+static inline target_ulong adjust_addr(CPURISCVState *env,
target_ulong addr)
+{
+ return (addr & env->mask) | env->base;
+}
The code here in vector_helper.c looks fine as a patch by itself,
under the subject that you have given.
r~
