Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] target-arm: get_phys_addr_lpae: more xn control

2015-03-11 Thread Andrew Jones
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 04:05:06PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote: This patch makes the following changes to the determination of whether an address is executable, when translating addresses using LPAE. 1. No longer assumes that PL0 can't execute when it can't read. It can in AArch64, a

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] target-arm: get_phys_addr_lpae: more xn control

2015-03-10 Thread Andrew Jones
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 04:55:53PM +, Peter Maydell wrote: On 10 March 2015 at 16:48, Andrew Jones drjo...@redhat.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 03:56:11PM +, Peter Maydell wrote: For instance, you're missing a shift here on the ap bits, because get_rw_prot needs AP[2:0] and

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] target-arm: get_phys_addr_lpae: more xn control

2015-03-10 Thread Andrew Jones
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 05:14:21PM +, Peter Maydell wrote: On 10 March 2015 at 17:02, Andrew Jones drjo...@redhat.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 04:55:53PM +, Peter Maydell wrote: On 10 March 2015 at 16:48, Andrew Jones drjo...@redhat.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] target-arm: get_phys_addr_lpae: more xn control

2015-03-10 Thread Andrew Jones
On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 03:56:11PM +, Peter Maydell wrote: On 12 February 2015 at 15:05, Andrew Jones drjo...@redhat.com wrote: This patch makes the following changes to the determination of whether an address is executable, when translating addresses using LPAE. 1. No longer

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] target-arm: get_phys_addr_lpae: more xn control

2015-03-10 Thread Peter Maydell
On 10 March 2015 at 16:48, Andrew Jones drjo...@redhat.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 03:56:11PM +, Peter Maydell wrote: For instance, you're missing a shift here on the ap bits, because get_rw_prot needs AP[2:0] and 'ap' here is AP[2:1]. Don't need the shift because get_rw_prot

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] target-arm: get_phys_addr_lpae: more xn control

2015-03-10 Thread Peter Maydell
On 10 March 2015 at 17:02, Andrew Jones drjo...@redhat.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 04:55:53PM +, Peter Maydell wrote: On 10 March 2015 at 16:48, Andrew Jones drjo...@redhat.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 03:56:11PM +, Peter Maydell wrote: For instance, you're missing a

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] target-arm: get_phys_addr_lpae: more xn control

2015-03-10 Thread Peter Maydell
On 10 March 2015 at 17:28, Andrew Jones drjo...@redhat.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 05:14:21PM +, Peter Maydell wrote:[?] No, because patch 2 doesn't do anything in the callers to make them pass only bits [2:1]. So after patch 2 get_rw_prot still requires bits [2:0]. Except it's

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] target-arm: get_phys_addr_lpae: more xn control

2015-03-10 Thread Peter Maydell
On 12 February 2015 at 15:05, Andrew Jones drjo...@redhat.com wrote: This patch makes the following changes to the determination of whether an address is executable, when translating addresses using LPAE. 1. No longer assumes that PL0 can't execute when it can't read. It can in AArch64, a

[Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] target-arm: get_phys_addr_lpae: more xn control

2015-02-12 Thread Andrew Jones
This patch makes the following changes to the determination of whether an address is executable, when translating addresses using LPAE. 1. No longer assumes that PL0 can't execute when it can't read. It can in AArch64, a difference from AArch32. 2. Use va_size == 64 to determine we're in

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/5] target-arm: get_phys_addr_lpae: more xn control

2015-02-12 Thread Andrew Jones
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 04:05:06PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote: This patch makes the following changes to the determination of whether an address is executable, when translating addresses using LPAE. 1. No longer assumes that PL0 can't execute when it can't read. It can in AArch64, a