Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/6] target-arm: correct CNTFRQ access rights

[Peter Maydell]

On 8 February 2016 at 15:25, Sergey Fedorov <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 05.02.2016 19:44, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> Correct some corner cases we were getting wrong for
>> CNTFRQ access rights:
>>  * should UNDEF from 32-bit Secure EL1
>>  * only writable from the highest implemented exception level,
>>    which might not be EL1 now

>> +    switch (arm_current_el(env)) {
>> +    case 0:
>> +        if (!extract32(env->cp15.c14_cntkctl, 0, 2)) {
>> +            return CP_ACCESS_TRAP;
>> +        }
>> +        /* EL0 reads are forbidden by the .access fields */
>
> s/reads/writes/ ?

Yes.

>> +        break;
>> +    case 1:
>> +        if (!isread && (arm_feature(env, ARM_FEATURE_EL2)
>> +                        || arm_feature(env, ARM_FEATURE_EL3))) {
>> +            return CP_ACCESS_TRAP_UNCATEGORIZED;
>> +        }
>> +        if (!isread && ri->state == ARM_CP_STATE_AA32 &&
>> +            arm_is_secure_below_el3(env)) {
>> +            /* Accesses from 32-bit Secure EL1 UNDEF (*not* trap to EL3!) */
>> +            return CP_ACCESS_TRAP_UNCATEGORIZED;
>> +        }
>> +        break;
>> +    case 2:
>> +        if (!isread && arm_feature(env, ARM_FEATURE_EL3)) {
>> +            return CP_ACCESS_TRAP_UNCATEGORIZED;
>> +        }
>> +        break;
>> +    case 3:
>> +        break;
>>      }
>>      return CP_ACCESS_OK;
>>  }
>
> Maybe calculating "the highest implemented exception level" could
> simplify reading of the code a bit? E.g.:
>
>     int highest_el = arm_feature(env, ARM_FEATURE_EL3) ? 3 :
>                      arm_feature(env, ARM_FEATURE_EL2) ? 2 : 1;
>
> We would probably want to have a dedicated static inline function for
> this similar to HighestEL() from ARMv8 ARM pseudocode.

Mmm, that might look neater. I'll have a play with the code.

thanks
-- PMM