qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [PATCH 03/16] target/riscv/cpu.c: restrict 'mvendorid' value


From: Daniel Henrique Barboza
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/16] target/riscv/cpu.c: restrict 'mvendorid' value
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2023 17:06:33 -0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.10.0



On 6/6/23 10:19, Andrew Jones wrote:
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 04:46:10PM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
We're going to change the handling of mvendorid/marchid/mimpid by the
KVM driver. Since these are always present in all CPUs let's put the
same validation for everyone.

It doesn't make sense to allow 'mvendorid' to be different than it
is already set in named (vendor) CPUs. Generic (dynamic) CPUs can have
any 'mvendorid' they want.

Change 'mvendorid' to be a class property created via
'object_class_property_add', instead of using the DEFINE_PROP_UINT32()
macro. This allow us to define a custom setter for it that will verify,
for named CPUs, if mvendorid is different than it is already set by the
CPU. This is the error thrown for the 'veyron-v1' CPU if 'mvendorid' is
set to an invalid value:

$ qemu-system-riscv64 -M virt -nographic -cpu veyron-v1,mvendorid=2
qemu-system-riscv64: can't apply global veyron-v1-riscv-cpu.mvendorid=2:
     Unable to change veyron-v1-riscv-cpu mvendorid (0x61f)

Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <dbarboza@ventanamicro.com>
---
  target/riscv/cpu.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
  1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/target/riscv/cpu.c b/target/riscv/cpu.c
index 72f5433776..bcd69bb032 100644
--- a/target/riscv/cpu.c
+++ b/target/riscv/cpu.c
@@ -1723,7 +1723,6 @@ static void riscv_cpu_add_user_properties(Object *obj)
  static Property riscv_cpu_properties[] = {
      DEFINE_PROP_BOOL("debug", RISCVCPU, cfg.debug, true),
- DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("mvendorid", RISCVCPU, cfg.mvendorid, 0),
      DEFINE_PROP_UINT64("marchid", RISCVCPU, cfg.marchid, RISCV_CPU_MARCHID),
      DEFINE_PROP_UINT64("mimpid", RISCVCPU, cfg.mimpid, RISCV_CPU_MIMPID),
@@ -1810,6 +1809,32 @@ static const struct TCGCPUOps riscv_tcg_ops = {
  #endif /* !CONFIG_USER_ONLY */
  };
+static bool riscv_cpu_is_dynamic(Object *cpu_obj)
+{
+    return object_dynamic_cast(cpu_obj, TYPE_RISCV_DYNAMIC_CPU) != NULL;
+}
+
+static void cpu_set_mvendorid(Object *obj, Visitor *v, const char *name,
+                              void *opaque, Error **errp)
+{
+    bool dynamic_cpu = riscv_cpu_is_dynamic(obj);
+    RISCVCPU *cpu = RISCV_CPU(obj);
+    uint32_t prev_val = cpu->cfg.mvendorid;
+    uint32_t value;
+
+    if (!visit_type_uint32(v, name, &value, errp)) {
+        return;
+    }
+
+    if (!dynamic_cpu && prev_val != value) {
+        error_setg(errp, "Unable to change %s mvendorid (0x%x)",
+                   object_get_typename(obj), prev_val);
+        return;
+    }
+
+    cpu->cfg.mvendorid = value;
+}
+
  static void riscv_cpu_class_init(ObjectClass *c, void *data)
  {
      RISCVCPUClass *mcc = RISCV_CPU_CLASS(c);
@@ -1841,6 +1866,10 @@ static void riscv_cpu_class_init(ObjectClass *c, void 
*data)
      cc->gdb_get_dynamic_xml = riscv_gdb_get_dynamic_xml;
      cc->tcg_ops = &riscv_tcg_ops;
+ object_class_property_add(c, "mvendorid", "uint32", NULL,
+                              cpu_set_mvendorid,
+                              NULL, NULL);
+

Shouldn't we provide a get function as well?

We can. I refrain from adding a get() interface because I didn't add new code 
that
access mvendorid via object_property_get_uint(OBJECT(cpu), "mvendorid", errp). 
The
code that access this value uses cpu->cfg.mvendorid directly.

It would be interesting to add a get() interface if cpu->cfg.mvendorid was a 
value
that was read in a different manner that it's stored. It's not the case ATM, so
I only added the set() interface.


Thanks,


Daniel




      device_class_set_props(dc, riscv_cpu_properties);
  }
--
2.40.1



Otherwise,

Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>



reply via email to

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