qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv3 3/5] RISC-V: Check PMP during Page Table Walks


From: Hesham Almatary
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv3 3/5] RISC-V: Check PMP during Page Table Walks
Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 10:26:44 +0100

On Tue, 21 May 2019 at 23:40, Alistair Francis <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 3:44 AM Hesham Almatary
> <address@hidden> wrote:
> >
> > The PMP should be checked when doing a page table walk, and report access
> > fault exception if the to-be-read PTE failed the PMP check.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Jonathan Behrens <address@hidden>
> > Signed-off-by: Hesham Almatary <address@hidden>
> > ---
> >  target/riscv/cpu.h        |  1 +
> >  target/riscv/cpu_helper.c | 10 +++++++++-
> >  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/target/riscv/cpu.h b/target/riscv/cpu.h
> > index c17184f4e4..ab3ba3f15a 100644
> > --- a/target/riscv/cpu.h
> > +++ b/target/riscv/cpu.h
> > @@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ enum {
> >  #define PRIV_VERSION_1_09_1 0x00010901
> >  #define PRIV_VERSION_1_10_0 0x00011000
> >
> > +#define TRANSLATE_PMP_FAIL 2
> >  #define TRANSLATE_FAIL 1
> >  #define TRANSLATE_SUCCESS 0
> >  #define NB_MMU_MODES 4
> > diff --git a/target/riscv/cpu_helper.c b/target/riscv/cpu_helper.c
> > index 7c7282c680..d0b0f9cf88 100644
> > --- a/target/riscv/cpu_helper.c
> > +++ b/target/riscv/cpu_helper.c
> > @@ -211,6 +211,12 @@ restart:
> >
> >          /* check that physical address of PTE is legal */
> >          target_ulong pte_addr = base + idx * ptesize;
> > +
> > +        if (riscv_feature(env, RISCV_FEATURE_PMP) &&
> > +            !pmp_hart_has_privs(env, pte_addr, sizeof(target_ulong),
> > +            1 << MMU_DATA_LOAD)) {
>
> I see a problem here.
>
> pmp_hart_has_privs() checks permissions based on the current value of
> env->priv. This might not always be the correct permissions to check,
> we should instead use the current mode to check permissions.
>
That is not clear to me. Isn't env->priv the current privildge mode?
Could you please elaborate on what other cases this might not be the case?

> The best way to do this to me is to probably provide a privileged mode
> override to the function, can you add that?
>
> Alistair
>
> > +            return TRANSLATE_PMP_FAIL;
> > +        }
> >  #if defined(TARGET_RISCV32)
> >          target_ulong pte = ldl_phys(cs->as, pte_addr);
> >  #elif defined(TARGET_RISCV64)
> > @@ -405,8 +411,10 @@ bool riscv_cpu_tlb_fill(CPUState *cs, vaddr address, 
> > int size,
> >      if (riscv_feature(env, RISCV_FEATURE_PMP) &&
> >          (ret == TRANSLATE_SUCCESS) &&
> >          !pmp_hart_has_privs(env, pa, TARGET_PAGE_SIZE, 1 << access_type)) {
> > +        ret = TRANSLATE_PMP_FAIL;
> > +    }
> > +    if (ret == TRANSLATE_PMP_FAIL) {
> >          pmp_violation = true;
> > -        ret = TRANSLATE_FAIL;
> >      }
> >      if (ret == TRANSLATE_SUCCESS) {
> >          tlb_set_page(cs, address & TARGET_PAGE_MASK, pa & TARGET_PAGE_MASK,
> > --
> > 2.17.1
> >
> >



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]