[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Qemu-devel] Re: [BUG] Possible bug in sparc64 emulation of SAVE/RESTORE
From: |
Jakub Jermar |
Subject: |
[Qemu-devel] Re: [BUG] Possible bug in sparc64 emulation of SAVE/RESTORE |
Date: |
Sun, 11 Jan 2009 21:11:47 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090105) |
Blue Swirl wrote:
> On 1/11/09, Jakub Jermar <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've just noticed that functions:
>>
>> helper_save()
>> helper_restore()
>> cpu_cwp_inc()
>> cpu_cwp_dec
>>
>> assume that CWP moves counter-clock-wise on sparc64.
>> I am pretty sure it moves clock-wise on sparc64
>> (contrary to the situation on sparc32).
>
> True, but internally we use V8 way to make register window handling
> simpler. Outside world should see CWP acting as specified.
>
> There is a comment about this somewhere, maybe it is unclear.
Aha, so it is me who was actually confused :-)
I am tracking some kind of a corruption:
GDB loses control on the RETRY instruction
of the fill_0_normal_tl0 handler. QEMU continues
to execute and ends up in Error state.
qemu: fatal: Trap 0x0008 while trap level (5) >= MAXTL (5), Error state
pc: 000000000040c100 npc: 000000000040c104
General Registers:
%g0: 0000000000000000 %g1: 0000000000000000 %g2: 0000000000000000 %g3:
0000000000000000
%g4: 0000000000000000 %g5: 0000000000000000 %g6: 0000000000000000 %g7:
0000000000000000
Current Register Window:
%o0: 0000000000000046 %o1: 0000000000717dc0 %o2: 0000000000717f50 %o3:
0000000000000000
%o4: 000000000000000a %o5: 0000000000717cff %o6: 0000000000717521 %o7:
0000000000432198
%l0: 0000000000000004 %l1: 000000000005c980 %l2: 000000000043d888 %l3:
000000000005c000
%l4: 0000000000000001 %l5: 000000000043e5f8 %l6: 0000000000000001 %l7:
000000000045e368
%i0: 000000000005c980 %i1: 0000000000000000 %i2: 0000000000000000 %i3:
000000000042d120
%i4: 000000000042d100 %i5: 0000000000000005 %i6: 00000000007175f1 %i7:
0000000000421db8
Floating Point Registers:
%f00: 000000000.000000 000000000.000000 000000000.000000 000000000.000000
%f04: 000000000.000000 000000000.000000 000000000.000000 000000000.000000
%f08: 000000000.000000 000000000.000000 000000000.000000 000000000.000000
%f12: 000000000.000000 000000000.000000 000000000.000000 000000000.000000
%f16: 000000000.000000 000000000.000000 000000000.000000 000000000.000000
%f20: 000000000.000000 000000000.000000 000000000.000000 000000000.000000
%f24: 000000000.000000 000000000.000000 000000000.000000 000000000.000000
%f28: 000000000.000000 000000000.000000 000000000.000000 000000000.000000
pstate: 0x00000414 ccr: 0x00 asi: 0x58 tl: 5 fprs: 0
cansave: 4 canrestore: 2 otherwin: 0 wstate 0 cleanwin 7 cwp 2
fsr: 0x00000000
Aborted
The interesting thing is that GDB doesn't break into the debugger when it
starts executing the function which has its address in pc (i.e.
instruction_access_exception_tl1), even though I set a breakpoint for it.
(I set breakpoints for all MMU-related traps, but didn't hit any).
Jakub