From: "Sunil V L" <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
To: Tuan Phan <tphan@ventanamicro.com>
Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io, michael.d.kinney@intel.com,
gaoliming@byosoft.com.cn, zhiguang.liu@intel.com,
kraxel@redhat.com, lersek@redhat.com, rahul1.kumar@intel.com,
ray.ni@intel.com, jiewen.yao@intel.com,
andrei.warkentin@intel.com, ardb+tianocore@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v4 3/4] UefiCpuPkg: RISC-V: MMU: Support Svpbmt extension
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 18:30:14 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zfg63v8lfMKa0rW5@sunil-laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240314201917.1756-4-tphan@ventanamicro.com>
Hi Tuan,
On Thu, Mar 14, 2024 at 01:19:16PM -0700, Tuan Phan wrote:
> The GCD EFI_MEMORY_UC and EFI_MEMORY_WC memory attributes will be
> supported when Svpbmt extension available.
>
> Cc: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
> Cc: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
> Cc: Rahul Kumar <rahul1.kumar@intel.com>
> Cc: Ray Ni <ray.ni@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Tuan Phan <tphan@ventanamicro.com>
> ---
> .../Library/BaseRiscVMmuLib/BaseRiscVMmuLib.c | 106 ++++++++++++++----
> .../BaseRiscVMmuLib/BaseRiscVMmuLib.inf | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 86 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/BaseRiscVMmuLib/BaseRiscVMmuLib.c b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/BaseRiscVMmuLib/BaseRiscVMmuLib.c
> index 46ba4b4709b1..34300dca5c34 100644
> --- a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/BaseRiscVMmuLib/BaseRiscVMmuLib.c
> +++ b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/BaseRiscVMmuLib/BaseRiscVMmuLib.c
> @@ -36,6 +36,11 @@
> #define PTE_PPN_SHIFT 10
> #define RISCV_MMU_PAGE_SHIFT 12
>
> +#define RISCV_CPU_FEATURE_PBMT_BITMASK BIT2
> +#define PTE_PBMT_NC BIT61
> +#define PTE_PBMT_IO BIT62
> +#define PTE_PBMT_MASK (PTE_PBMT_NC | PTE_PBMT_IO)
> +
> STATIC UINTN mModeSupport[] = { SATP_MODE_SV57, SATP_MODE_SV48, SATP_MODE_SV39, SATP_MODE_OFF };
> STATIC UINTN mMaxRootTableLevel;
> STATIC UINTN mBitPerLevel;
> @@ -487,32 +492,82 @@ UpdateRegionMapping (
> /**
> Convert GCD attribute to RISC-V page attribute.
>
> - @param GcdAttributes The GCD attribute.
> + @param GcdAttributes The GCD attribute.
> + @param RiscVAttributes The pointer of RISC-V page attribute.
>
> - @return The RISC-V page attribute.
> + @retval EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER The RiscVAttributes is NULL or cache type mask not valid.
> + @retval EFI_SUCCESS The operation succesfully.
>
> **/
> STATIC
> -UINT64
> +EFI_STATUS
> GcdAttributeToPageAttribute (
> - IN UINT64 GcdAttributes
> + IN UINT64 GcdAttributes,
> + OUT UINT64 *RiscVAttributes
> )
> {
> - UINT64 RiscVAttributes;
> + UINT64 CacheTypeMask;
> + BOOLEAN PmbtExtEnabled;
>
Why not read the PCD once and save in a static variable?
> - RiscVAttributes = RISCV_PG_R | RISCV_PG_W | RISCV_PG_X;
> + if (RiscVAttributes == NULL) {
> + return EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER;
> + }
> +
> + *RiscVAttributes = RISCV_PG_R | RISCV_PG_W | RISCV_PG_X;
> +
> + PmbtExtEnabled = FALSE;
> + if ((PcdGet64 (PcdRiscVFeatureOverride) & RISCV_CPU_FEATURE_PBMT_BITMASK) != 0) {
> + PmbtExtEnabled = TRUE;
> + }
>
> // Determine protection attributes
> if ((GcdAttributes & EFI_MEMORY_RO) != 0) {
> - RiscVAttributes &= ~(UINT64)(RISCV_PG_W);
> + *RiscVAttributes &= ~(UINT64)(RISCV_PG_W);
> }
>
> // Process eXecute Never attribute
> if ((GcdAttributes & EFI_MEMORY_XP) != 0) {
> - RiscVAttributes &= ~(UINT64)RISCV_PG_X;
> + *RiscVAttributes &= ~(UINT64)RISCV_PG_X;
> + }
> +
> + CacheTypeMask = GcdAttributes & EFI_CACHE_ATTRIBUTE_MASK;
> + if ((CacheTypeMask != 0) &&
> + (((CacheTypeMask - 1) & CacheTypeMask) != 0))
> + {
> + DEBUG ((
> + DEBUG_ERROR,
> + "%a: More than one bit set in cache type mask (0x%LX)\n",
> + __func__,
> + CacheTypeMask
> + ));
> + return EFI_INVALID_PARAMETER;
> + }
> +
> + switch (CacheTypeMask) {
> + case EFI_MEMORY_UC:
> + if (PmbtExtEnabled) {
> + *RiscVAttributes |= PTE_PBMT_IO;
> + }
> +
> + break;
> + case EFI_MEMORY_WC:
> + if (PmbtExtEnabled) {
> + *RiscVAttributes |= PTE_PBMT_NC;
> + } else {
> + DEBUG ((
> + DEBUG_VERBOSE,
> + "%a: EFI_MEMORY_WC set but Pmbt extension not available\n",
> + __func__
> + ));
> + }
> +
> + break;
> + default:
> + // Default PMA mode
> + break;
> }
>
> - return RiscVAttributes;
> + return EFI_SUCCESS;
> }
>
> /**
> @@ -535,29 +590,38 @@ RiscVSetMemoryAttributes (
> IN UINT64 Attributes
> )
> {
> - UINT64 PageAttributesSet;
> + UINT64 PageAttributesSet;
> + UINT64 PageAttributesClear;
> + EFI_STATUS Status;
>
> - PageAttributesSet = GcdAttributeToPageAttribute (Attributes);
> + Status = GcdAttributeToPageAttribute (Attributes, &PageAttributesSet);
> + if (EFI_ERROR (Status)) {
> + return Status;
> + }
>
Is there a reason to do this prior to checking RiscVMmuEnabled()?
> if (!RiscVMmuEnabled ()) {
> return EFI_SUCCESS;
> }
>
> - DEBUG (
> - (
> - DEBUG_VERBOSE,
> - "%a: Set %llX page attribute 0x%X\n",
> - __func__,
> - BaseAddress,
> - PageAttributesSet
> - )
> - );
> + PageAttributesClear = PTE_ATTRIBUTES_MASK;
> + if ((PcdGet64 (PcdRiscVFeatureOverride) & RISCV_CPU_FEATURE_PBMT_BITMASK) != 0) {
> + PageAttributesClear |= PTE_PBMT_MASK;
> + }
> +
I think static variable would be better.
> + DEBUG ((
> + DEBUG_VERBOSE,
> + "%a: %LX: set attributes 0x%LX, clear attributes 0x%LX\n",
> + __func__,
> + BaseAddress,
> + PageAttributesSet,
> + PageAttributesClear
> + ));
>
> return UpdateRegionMapping (
> BaseAddress,
> Length,
> PageAttributesSet,
> - PTE_ATTRIBUTES_MASK,
> + PageAttributesClear,
> (UINT64 *)RiscVGetRootTranslateTable (),
> TRUE
> );
> diff --git a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/BaseRiscVMmuLib/BaseRiscVMmuLib.inf b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/BaseRiscVMmuLib/BaseRiscVMmuLib.inf
> index 51ebe1750e97..1dbaa81f3608 100644
> --- a/UefiCpuPkg/Library/BaseRiscVMmuLib/BaseRiscVMmuLib.inf
> +++ b/UefiCpuPkg/Library/BaseRiscVMmuLib/BaseRiscVMmuLib.inf
> @@ -28,3 +28,4 @@
>
> [Pcd]
> gUefiCpuPkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdCpuRiscVMmuMaxSatpMode ## CONSUMES
> + gEfiMdePkgTokenSpaceGuid.PcdRiscVFeatureOverride ## CONSUMES
> --
> 2.25.1
>
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#116839): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/116839
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/104934719/7686176
Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [rebecca@openfw.io]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-18 13:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-14 20:19 [edk2-devel] [PATCH v4 0/4] RISC-V: Support Svpbmt extension Tuan Phan
2024-03-14 20:19 ` [edk2-devel] [PATCH v4 1/4] MdePkg.dec: RISC-V: Define override bit for " Tuan Phan
2024-03-18 13:02 ` Sunil V L
2024-03-14 20:19 ` [edk2-devel] [PATCH v4 2/4] UefiCpuPkg: RISC-V: MMU: Explictly use UINT64 instead of UINTN Tuan Phan
2024-03-14 20:19 ` [edk2-devel] [PATCH v4 3/4] UefiCpuPkg: RISC-V: MMU: Support Svpbmt extension Tuan Phan
2024-03-18 13:00 ` Sunil V L [this message]
2024-03-19 16:44 ` Tuan Phan
[not found] ` <17BE38330B281CA5.29196@groups.io>
2024-04-02 22:42 ` Tuan Phan
2024-04-08 4:47 ` Sunil V L
2024-03-14 20:19 ` [edk2-devel] [PATCH v4 4/4] OvmfPkg/RiscVVirt: Disable " Tuan Phan
2024-03-18 13:01 ` Sunil V L
2024-04-08 5:45 ` [edk2-devel] [PATCH v4 0/4] RISC-V: Support " Sunil V L
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-list from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=Zfg63v8lfMKa0rW5@sunil-laptop \
--to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox