On 11/4/22 00:19, Peter Maydell wrote:
@@ -2671,6 +2671,13 @@ static bool get_phys_addr_with_struct(CPUARMState *env, S1Translate *ptw, bool is_secure = ptw->in_secure; ARMMMUIdx s1_mmu_idx;+ /* + * The page table entries may downgrade secure to non-secure, but + * cannot upgrade an non-secure translation regime's attributes + * to secure. + */ + result->f.attrs.secure = is_secure; + switch (mmu_idx) { case ARMMMUIdx_Phys_S: case ARMMMUIdx_Phys_NS: @@ -2712,12 +2719,6 @@ static bool get_phys_addr_with_struct(CPUARMState *env, S1Translate *ptw, break; } - /* - * The page table entries may downgrade secure to non-secure, but - * cannot upgrade an non-secure translation regime's attributes - * to secure. - */ - result->f.attrs.secure = is_secure; result->f.attrs.user = regime_is_user(env, mmu_idx);Do we also need to move this setting of attrs.user ? get_phys_addr_disabled() doesn't set that either.
I don't think so. The only cases which don't pass through the setting of attrs.user are the two Phys mmu_idx. Which was by design per the comment up there about artificially deciding which EL regime they belong to.
r~
