address@hidden wrote:
This is a (slightly adjusted for 2009-01-04 SVN) resend of Jan
Kiszka's
Reboot CPU on triple fault patch (see patch file for the exact
reference)
It seems like a consensus was reached on how to deal with tripple
faults,
but noone commited the last version (8) of the patch anyways.
Just for the record -- 386BSD relies on this behavior to reset the
CPU --
it unmaps the whole address space in order to trigger a tripple
fault.
Good that you picked this up! It is still on my to-do list to get
this
in, but with medium prio. However, let's try to push it a bit.
This is a slightly adjusted (for 2009-01-04 SVN) "reset on tripple
fault patch"
Originally from:
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] x86: Reboot CPU on triple fault -
Version 8
Message-ID: <address@hidden>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2008 18:17:18 +0200
From: Jan Kiszka <address@hidden>
Note that I posted an enhanced version on 2008-09-02, also covering
reset logging for non-x86 archs. Please use that one.
...
Index: target-i386/op_helper.c
===================================================================
--- target-i386/op_helper.c (revision 6159)
+++ target-i386/op_helper.c (working copy)
@@ -1244,6 +1244,9 @@
}
}
+/* This should come from sysemu.h - if we could include it
here... */
+void qemu_system_reset_request(void);
+
/*
* Check nested exceptions and change to double or triple fault if
* needed. It should only be called, if this is not an interrupt.
@@ -1261,9 +1264,19 @@
fprintf(logfile, "check_exception old: 0x%x new 0x%x\n",
env->old_exception, intno);
- if (env->old_exception == EXCP08_DBLE)
- cpu_abort(env, "triple fault");
+#if !defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY)
+ if (env->old_exception == EXCP08_DBLE) {
+ if (env->intercept)
+ helper_vmexit(SVM_EXIT_SHUTDOWN, 0);
+ if (loglevel & CPU_LOG_RESET)
+ fprintf(logfile, "Triple fault\n");
+
+ qemu_system_reset_request();
+ return EXCP_HLT;
+ }
+#endif
+
if ((first_contributory && second_contributory)
|| (env->old_exception == EXCP0E_PAGE &&
(second_contributory || (intno == EXCP0E_PAGE)))) {
I meanwhile think that SVM hook should rather look like this
helper_svm_check_intercept_param(SVM_EXIT_SHUTDOWN, 0);
in order to properly check if shutdown events are actually
intercepted.
Alexander, am I right?