Re: [PATCH v1 18/27] xen/riscv: add vaplic access check

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 10.03.2026 18:08, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/riscv/aplic.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/riscv/aplic.c
> @@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ static struct aplic_priv aplic = {
>  
>  static struct intc_info __ro_after_init aplic_info = {
>      .hw_version = INTC_APLIC,
> +    .private = &aplic,

Isn't this the host instance again? How can you ...

> --- a/xen/arch/riscv/vaplic.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/riscv/vaplic.c
> @@ -127,6 +127,20 @@ int vaplic_map_device_irqs_to_domain(struct domain *d,
>      return 0;
>  }
>  
> +static int cf_check vaplic_is_access(const struct vcpu *vcpu,
> +                                     const unsigned long addr)
> +{
> +    const struct vaplic *vaplic = to_vaplic(vcpu->domain->arch.vintc);
> +    const struct aplic_priv *priv = vaplic->base.info->private;
> +    const paddr_t paddr_end = priv->paddr_start + priv->size;
> +
> +    /* check if it is an APLIC access */
> +    if ( priv->paddr_start <= addr && addr < paddr_end )

... use that here? Or asked differently, again: Where's the virtualization,
i.e. the abstraction away from host properties?

Furthermore, is it really sufficient to check just the starting address of
an access? Shouldn't the last byte accessed also fall into the range in
question?

> +        return 1;
> +
> +    return 0;
> +}

This function looks to want to return bool (and then use true/false).

Jan