This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Armv9 RME Cache access and GPC sequence order

I'm studying the Realm Management Extensions, and a question came to mind. The Arm ARM and other documentation (e.g., den0126) suggest that, conceptually, the GPC is performed before any memory access (including the caches). However, since cache lines are tagged with the associated PA, I imagine that this cache tag is used in coherency protocols as part of the snooped address. If so, imagine a hypothetical scenario where we are using different GPTs in two coherent cores with mutually exclusive regions marked as Normal and the rest of the PA marked as Root, both running in the Normal world. Could one of the cores access the other core's memory by fetching the data via the coherency bus if it were present in the other core cache (thus tagged as Normal) despite being marked as Root in its local GPT? Would the line be fetched but blocked by the GPC? If not, this would contradict my first observation. What behavior should I expect in future implementations? Can you point me to other documentation that would clear this up for me?

Note that I am perfectly aware that CCA was designed for a single shared GPT across all PEs. However, the spec seems to suggest that this is kind of implementation dependent (constrained unpredictable behavior which allows it in one of the variants). Also, I imagine we'll only likely find TLB entries with cached GPT information shared across PEs in SMT implementations.

Parents Reply Children
  • If it's a shared GIC, which GPT is the SMMU using to perform the GIC's GPCs?

    That's a very good point. And as I said before, we'd like to leverage GPC as an extra protection layer on top of traditional virtual memory isolation...

    Which means at design time you have to know which accelerator to put behind which SMMU.

    Also, this actually falls under our constraints.

    Nevertheless, I'd love to hear your thoughts regarding FVP model fidelity to these kinds of issues.