Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date:   Mon, 25 Oct 2021 04:00:12 +0300
From:   Nick Kossifidis <mick@ics.forth.gr>
To:     Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>
Cc:     mick@ics.forth.gr, alexandre.ghiti@canonical.com,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: Don't use va_pa_offset on kdump
Organization: FORTH
In-Reply-To: <mhng-b28fa0cb-24ee-40d1-9f02-619605a4cc9a@palmerdabbelt-glaptop>
References: <mhng-b28fa0cb-24ee-40d1-9f02-619605a4cc9a@palmerdabbelt-glaptop>
Message-ID: <d4d0d13c9fda686575f1040cd16b516f@mailhost.ics.forth.gr>
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.16
Precedence: bulk

Στις 2021-10-23 23:14, Palmer Dabbelt έγραψε:
> On Sat, 09 Oct 2021 06:18:48 PDT (-0700), mick@ics.forth.gr wrote:
>> Στις 2021-10-06 14:13, Alexandre Ghiti έγραψε:
>>>> +
>>>> +       /* This will trigger a jump to CSR_STVEC anyway */
>>>>         jalr    zero, a2, 0
>>> 
>>> The last jump to a2 can be removed since the fault will be triggered
>>> before even reaching this instruction.
>>> 
>> 
>> Just switching SATP to zero doesn't generate a trap unless mstatus.TVM
>> is set (for visualization purposes). The hart will try and execute the
>> next instruction but it's not clear in the spec what happens in case 
>> the
>> code is cached, I don't want to rely solely on STVEC. I prefer having
>> this instruction there, note that some earlier QEMU versions also had
>> this behavior (the original kdump patch didn't set STVEC and it worked
>> fine after setting SATP to zero).
> 
> IIRC this came down to some very specific wording in the spec.
> Something along the lines of the 0 in SATP meaning "no translation",
> SFENCE.VMA ordering translations, and the general "if the spec doesn't
> mention it then it has to work" logic.  I thought I opened a spec
> issue about this for clarification, but I can't find it.
> 

I guess you mean this one:
https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual/issues/538

I couldn't find anything though regarding cached code, it's not that 
there's going to be a load after setting satp to 0 if the code has been 
cached, so even if the translation is cached we don't have a guarantee 
that the next instruction will result a trap.

> That said, I'm perfectly fine taking the safe approach here as it's
> not like the performance matters here.  Warrants a comment, though.
> 

ACK

> 
> I don't have a v2 in my inbox, did I miss something?  Also, if it's
> just the tags then it's generally not necessary to re-send something.
> The comment does, though.
> 
> LMK if you want me to deal with this, or if there's going to be a v2.
> 
> Thanks!

I'll send a v2 with the tags and the comment.

Regards,
Nick