On 3/2/23 19:04, Peter Maydell wrote:
On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 at 17:17, Eric Auger <eric.au...@redhat.com> wrote:
Many registers whose 'cooked' writefns induce TLB maintenance do
not have raw_writefn ops defined. If only the writefn ops is set
(ie. no raw_writefn is provided), it is assumed the cooked also
work as the raw one. For those registers it is not obvious the
tlb_flush works on KVM mode so better/safer setting the raw write.
Signed-off-by: Eric Auger <eric.au...@redhat.com>
Suggested-by: Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org>
---
I'am not familiar with those callbacks. I have tested in kvm accelerated
mode including migration but I fail to test with TCG. It SIGSEVs for
me even without my additions. I am not sure whether the .raw_writefn
must be set only for registers only doing some TLB maintenance or
shall be set safely on other registers doing TLB maintenance + other
state settings.
---
@@ -718,16 +718,20 @@ static const ARMCPRegInfo not_v7_cp_reginfo[] = {
* the unified TLB ops but also the dside/iside/inner-shareable variants.
*/
{ .name = "TLBIALL", .cp = 15, .crn = 8, .crm = CP_ANY,
- .opc1 = CP_ANY, .opc2 = 0, .access = PL1_W, .writefn = tlbiall_write,
+ .opc1 = CP_ANY, .opc2 = 0, .access = PL1_W,
+ .writefn = tlbiall_write, .raw_writefn = raw_write,
.type = ARM_CP_NO_RAW },
Anything with type ARM_CP_NO_RAW shouldn't need a .raw_writefn, because
that type indication says that it's a bug if we ever call
read_raw_cp_reg() or write_raw_cp_reg() on it. (Specifically,
for KVM, we should never end up trying to do a raw read/write
for a state sync because write_list_to_cpustate() and
write_cpustate_to_list() skip NO_RAW cpregs.)
Ah, this is the check added by commit 375421ccae ("target-arm: Add
checks that cpreg raw accesses are handled"). So this patch shouldn't
pass check-qtest, right?
