On Sat, Apr 9, 2022 at 2:25 AM Nicolas Pitre <n...@fluxnic.net> wrote:
>
> There is an overflow with the current code where a pmpaddr value of
> 0x1fffffff is decoded as sa=0 and ea=0 whereas it should be sa=0 and
> ea=0xffffffff.
>
> Fix that by simplifying the computation. There is in fact no need for
> ctz64() nor special case for -1 to achieve proper results.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <n...@fluxnic.net>
Reviewed-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.fran...@wdc.com>
Alistair
> ---
>
> This is in fact the same patch I posted yesterday but turns out its
> scope is far more important than I initially thought.
>
> diff --git a/target/riscv/pmp.c b/target/riscv/pmp.c
> index 81b61bb65c..151da3fa08 100644
> --- a/target/riscv/pmp.c
> +++ b/target/riscv/pmp.c
> @@ -141,17 +141,9 @@ static void pmp_decode_napot(target_ulong a,
> target_ulong *sa, target_ulong *ea)
> 0111...1111 2^(XLEN+2)-byte NAPOT range
> 1111...1111 Reserved
> */
> - if (a == -1) {
> - *sa = 0u;
> - *ea = -1;
> - return;
> - } else {
> - target_ulong t1 = ctz64(~a);
> - target_ulong base = (a & ~(((target_ulong)1 << t1) - 1)) << 2;
> - target_ulong range = ((target_ulong)1 << (t1 + 3)) - 1;
> - *sa = base;
> - *ea = base + range;
> - }
> + a = (a << 2) | 0x3;
> + *sa = a & (a + 1);
> + *ea = a | (a + 1);
> }
>
> void pmp_update_rule_addr(CPURISCVState *env, uint32_t pmp_index)
>
