qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [RFC PATCH v3 11/11] tests: add plugin asserting correctness of disc


From: Richard Henderson
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 11/11] tests: add plugin asserting correctness of discon event's to_pc
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2024 13:42:38 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird

On 12/6/24 13:02, Pierrick Bouvier wrote:
On 12/6/24 00:42, Julian Ganz wrote:
Hi Pierrick,

December 5, 2024 at 11:28 PM, "Pierrick Bouvier" wrote:
On 12/5/24 13:22, Julian Ganz wrote:
  December 5, 2024 at 6:30 PM, "Pierrick Bouvier" wrote:
We can store the next_expected pc for each instruction (from current_instruction + insn_length), and we should be able to compare that with the expected from_pc.
  This is mostly what contrib/plugins/cflow.c does.

  With that, we can test from_pc.

  I'm not confident that this will work reliably for branch, jump and
  other "interesting" instructions. But I can have a closer look at the
  cflow plugin and try to figure out how that plugin handles those cases.

It won't work for latest instructions in a tb (because we don't know what will be the next one), but should be good for all the others cases.

IIUC qemu will schedule interrupts "opportunistically" between tb
executions. If that's the case we'll observe interrupts exclusively
after the last instruction in a tb. That strikes me as a serious
limitation.


To reuse fancy vocabulary, maybe we should have a distinction between inferable interruptions (interrupt instruction) and uninferable interrupts, triggered by an external event.

In the latter, it *might* be acceptable to not provide a from_pc (let's say a value 0), because there is no useful information in itself, except creating random edges in the control flow graph, which we don't want to do.

What do you think of it?

I think you both are over-complicating things.

Always, env->pc (or whatever) within cc->cpu_exec_interrupt *is* where the interrupt is recognized, and *is* where the discontinuity occurs. Report that.

Just because some device interrupts are deferred to the end of the TB, that makes no difference. There is no "right" answer for timing between execution and asynchronous interrupts.


r~



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]