[lkml]   [2018]   [Nov]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH] KVM: arm64: don't single-step for non-emulated faults

Peter Maydell <> writes:

> On 7 November 2018 at 17:39, Peter Maydell <> wrote:
>> On 7 November 2018 at 17:10, Alex Bennée <> wrote:
>>> Not all faults handled by handle_exit are instruction emulations. For
>>> example a ESR_ELx_EC_IABT will result in the page tables being updated
>>> but the instruction that triggered the fault hasn't actually executed
>>> yet. We use the simple heuristic of checking for a changed PC before
>>> seeing if kvm_arm_handle_step_debug wants to claim we stepped an
>>> instruction.
>>> Signed-off-by: Alex Bennée <>
>> What's the rationale for this change? Presumably it's fixing
>> something, but the commit message doesn't really say what...
>> This feels to me like it's working around the fact that
>> we've separated two things ("advance pc (or set it if we're
>> going to make the guest take an exception)" and "notice that
>> we have completed a single step") that should be handled
>> at one point in the code.
> for instance if your guest PC is at the entrypoint for
> an exception, and you singlestep and take the same exception
> again, this should count as a single step completed, even
> though the PC has not changed. Granted, that's a little
> contrived, but it can happen in cases where the guest gets
> completely confused and is sitting in a tight loop taking
> exceptions because there's no ram at the vector table
> address, or whatever.

The alternative I thought of as I was hacking^H^H^H^H^H^H carefully
engineering this was to expand arm_exit_handlers[] and tag each handler
that was an instruction emulation and gate on that.

Alex Bennée

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-11-08 13:27    [W:0.062 / U:3.972 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site