[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH for-6.2 07/43] target/ppc: Set fault address in ppc_cpu_do_un
Cédric Le Goater
Re: [PATCH for-6.2 07/43] target/ppc: Set fault address in ppc_cpu_do_unaligned_access
Fri, 30 Jul 2021 19:23:41 +0200
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0
On 7/30/21 7:13 PM, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On 7/29/21 8:05 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> On 7/29/21 3:44 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 01:51, Richard Henderson
>>> <email@example.com> wrote:
>>>> We ought to have been recording the virtual address for reporting
>>>> to the guest trap handler.
>>>> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
>>>> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <email@example.com>
>>>> target/ppc/excp_helper.c | 2 ++
>>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>>> diff --git a/target/ppc/excp_helper.c b/target/ppc/excp_helper.c
>>>> index a79a0ed465..0b2c6de442 100644
>>>> --- a/target/ppc/excp_helper.c
>>>> +++ b/target/ppc/excp_helper.c
>>>> @@ -1503,6 +1503,8 @@ void ppc_cpu_do_unaligned_access(CPUState *cs, vaddr
>>>> CPUPPCState *env = cs->env_ptr;
>>>> uint32_t insn;
>>>> + env->spr[SPR_DAR] = vaddr;
>>> Is this the right SPR for all PPC variants? For instance the
>>> kernel's code in arch/powerpc/kernel/exceptions-64e.S looks
>>> in SPRN_DEAR, which is our SPR_BOOKE_DEAR or SPR_40x_DEAR.
> Indeed :/
>> I have no idea. I glanced through a handful of the mmu's, and looked at the
>> current BookS docs, but that's certainly not all.
> I took a look at some more and for instance, e300 uses DAR and e500, 405, 476
> use DEAR.
> DAR should be consistent over the server processors.
and is_book3s_arch2x(env) is a good way to test.