You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
"In Risc-v privileged spec section "Guest Physical Address Translation" states that:
The G bit in all G-stage PTEs is reserved for future standard use. Until its use is defined by a standard extension, it should be cleared by software for forward compatibility, and must be ignored by hardware.
I wrote an assertion that states:
If during the second stage translation, the pte.g bit is high then in the next cycle trans_error must be asserted.
Below is the counter-example of the assertion failure. Here translate_pdtp=0, en_1s=1 and en_2s = 1. In the 11th cycle there is the first leaf pte where iosatp is translated, in the 13th cycle there is the second leaf pte where first stage translation happened, and in the 15th cycle, there is a third non-leaf pte for G-Stage translation where pte.g bit is high. Now in the next cycle trans_error must be high because pte.g bit is asserted but here trans_error=0 which is wrong.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
mhayat-10xe
changed the title
G bit high in G-stage
G bit high in G-stage but not throwing error
Jul 12, 2024
"In Risc-v privileged spec section "Guest Physical Address Translation" states that:
I wrote an assertion that states:
Below is the counter-example of the assertion failure. Here
translate_pdtp
=0,en_1s
=1 anden_2s
= 1. In the 11th cycle there is the first leaf pte whereiosatp
is translated, in the 13th cycle there is the second leaf pte where first stage translation happened, and in the 15th cycle, there is a third non-leaf pte for G-Stage translation wherepte.g
bit is high. Now in the next cycletrans_error
must be high becausepte.g
bit is asserted but heretrans_error
=0 which is wrong.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: