1. Tech-Privileged
  2. Messages

Re: [RISC-V] [tech-virt-mem] Help needed on physical address issues

Ke Chai
 

Hi Greg, 

Thanks for replying! I am sure your answer about the RISC-V Unified Discovery perfectly answered my question 2. 

In my current implementation, bit [55:50] is simply ignored, which means my PMA checker receives bits [49:0] as its input. I am asking for help because I suspect that I am doing the wrong thing. As I understand your answer, this is a possible solution, but what I really want to know is whether both measures (ignore high-order bits versus reporting PMA vacant region) are acceptable or either one is the only correct answer. The RISC-V ISA documents are really giving me little clue about this. 

Thanks again,
Ricky Chai


Greg Favor <gfavor@...> 于2022年8月10日周三 00:09写道：

On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 7:07 AM mark <markhimelstein@...> wrote:
On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 3:24 AM Ke Chai <ck.rickytino@...> wrote:
To whom it may concern,

Hello! I am currently working on a RV64 CPU featuring Sv48 and Sv39, and came up with several questions that none of the existing documents have clearly specified: 

1. The physical address width in my RV64 implementation is 50 bits. If a 56-bit address is generated (e.g. from a leaf PTE's PPN concatenates an address offset, or from a physical address translated directly from a virtual address under M mode) with non-zero at the high bits (i.e. bits 55-50), should I just ignore the high bits, or report an access fault exception (assuming this is recognized as an vacant address space during a PMA check)?

2. Is there any way the M-mode software can know how many physical address bits are implemented on this implementation?

3. I saw a sentence on the RISC-V privileged architecture document at the end of section 4.3.2:
"The algorithm does not admit the possibility of ignoring high-order PPN bits for implementations with narrower physical addresses". What does "does not admit the possibility" supposed to mean? What action would be taken by hardware if the high-order PPN bits are not zero?

The way to view this matter is that PA's are full 56-bit zero-extended values.  It is up to PMAs to, for example, mark the top six bits of PA space as a big 'vacant' region that results in an Access Fault on all attempted accesses with PA[55:50] != 'b000000.  That 'vacant' PMA region can of course be a "fixed" PMA region that only requires the address decode logic gates to implement.

The new (in development) RISC-V Unified Discovery mechanism will support low-level discovery of exactly things like this (and many other things).  If you're running, for example, a Linux OS, then higher-level (post OS boot) discovery would typically be provided via Device Tree of ACPI tables.

Greg
Join tech-privileged@lists.riscv.org to automatically receive all group messages.