Re: SBI Debug Console Extension Proposal (Draft v2)
On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 05:38:43PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
Also, a system might be partitioned into domains so a supervisor softwareSo domain is a new term which is not presently defined in the privileged specification or in the SBI specification.
I think I get what you may be stating here i.e., M-mode may configure/
reconfigure PMPs to restrict the physical addresses that are accessible to the supervisor-mode. Perhaps a future Smpu extension may add to this mix.
To avoid inventing a new term, we could reword #1 to state that the physical address must be accessible, as determined by the PMP and/or PMA rules, to the
supervisor mode software invoking this SBI function.
To further restrict this perhaps say "accessible to read"? As we may not want execute-only to be allowed by this extension.
Since "domain" is a concept that is not defined by either the privilege
specification or the SBI specification we may want to avoid using that
term (or add a definition).
This is more a requirement on the supervisor-mode software becauseThis is confusing since the description states that the parameter is a
physical address but the later comment states its a virtual address
and the memory type override using page-based memory type provided by
the virtual memory system is allowed. Could we clarify if its a physical
address - in which case only the coherence and cachability PMA should provide the memory type - or a virtual address in which case page-based memory type override is possible.
Further, a brief explanation about why cachability matters for this extension would be useful. Is this trying to imply some kind of early
boot execution where caches may be placed in a special mode that allows
operation when main memory is not available.