From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net>

There is an overflow with the current code where a pmpaddr value of
0x1fffffff is decoded as sa=0 and ea=0 whereas it should be sa=0 and
ea=0xffffffff.

Fix that by simplifying the computation. There is in fact no need for
ctz64() nor special case for -1 to achieve proper results.

Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre <nico@fluxnic.net>
Reviewed-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com>
Message-Id: <rq81o86n-17ps-92no-p65o-79o88476266@syhkavp.arg>
Signed-off-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com>
---
 target/riscv/pmp.c | 14 +++-----------
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/target/riscv/pmp.c b/target/riscv/pmp.c
index 81b61bb65c..151da3fa08 100644
--- a/target/riscv/pmp.c
+++ b/target/riscv/pmp.c
@@ -141,17 +141,9 @@ static void pmp_decode_napot(target_ulong a, target_ulong *sa, target_ulong *ea)
        0111...1111   2^(XLEN+2)-byte NAPOT range
        1111...1111   Reserved
     */
-    if (a == -1) {
-        *sa = 0u;
-        *ea = -1;
-        return;
-    } else {
-        target_ulong t1 = ctz64(~a);
-        target_ulong base = (a & ~(((target_ulong)1 << t1) - 1)) << 2;
-        target_ulong range = ((target_ulong)1 << (t1 + 3)) - 1;
-        *sa = base;
-        *ea = base + range;
-    }
+    a = (a << 2) | 0x3;
+    *sa = a & (a + 1);
+    *ea = a | (a + 1);
 }
 
 void pmp_update_rule_addr(CPURISCVState *env, uint32_t pmp_index)
-- 
2.35.1