On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 at 10:29, Eric Auger <eau...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Hi Peter, > On 2/2/23 11:53, Peter Maydell wrote: > > On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 at 20:37, Richard Henderson > > <richard.hender...@linaro.org> wrote: > >> > >> On 2/1/23 04:20, Eric Auger wrote: > >>> What I fail to understand is why this code is called with a kvm > >>> accelerated qemu (the test runs by default with kvm). > >> ... > >>> #2 0x000002aaab1500f0 in vmsa_ttbr_write > >>> (env=0x2aaac393850, ri=0x2aaac3c90e0, value=2154950976315703518) at > >>> ../target/arm/helper.c:3784 > >>> #3 0x000002aaab14e5a8 in write_raw_cp_reg > >>> (env=env@entry=0x2aaac393850, ri=ri@entry=0x2aaac3c90e0, > >>> v=v@entry=2154950976315703518) > >> > >> This is indeed very curious -- vmsa_ttbr_write is supposed to be the > >> "cooked" .writefn, > >> not the .raw_writefn. We're not supposed to arrive here at all. > > > > If you only provide a cooked .writefn and no .raw_writefn, > > the default is to assume that the cooked function will also > > work as the raw one. None of the ARMCPRegInfo structs that > > use vmsa_ttbr_write specify a raw_writefn... > I fail to understand. Do you suggest we miss explicit .raw_writefn = > raw_write in many places and that's the source of our trouble. Indeed > entering the TCG code in KVM mode looks weird. > > Or is that supposed to work and we have a bug introduced by the abive > commit commit.
I don't know why the above commit specifically has caused a problem, but yes, the registers which do TLB maintenance calls in their writefns should set '.raw_writefn = raw_write'. -- PMM
