Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 04:02:51PM +0900, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 05, 2008 at 02:36:25PM +0800, Zhang, Xiantao wrote:
>>> Isaku Yamahata wrote:
>>>> For those who want to test it, here is the slightly update patch.
>>>> NOTE: this version doesn't solve the potential infinite loop
>>>> which Alex is suspecting about.
>>>>
>>>> IA64: fix emulation of fp emulation
>>>>
>>>> This patch fixes bug reported as
>>>> http://bugzilla.xensource.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1392
>>>>
>>>> When pv domain case, FPSWA hypercall isn't implemented properly.
>>>> So avoid the injecting floating point fault/trap at this moment.
>>>> However this may cause infinite loop depending on dtlb cache.
>>>> The right fix is to implement the hypercall properly however
>>>> it wouldn't be very straight forward because the argument
>>>> of fpswa is large and includes pointers.
>>>>
>>>> When hvm domain case, floating point trap case iip was incremented
>>>> improperly. removed the increment
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/ia64/vmx/vmx_fault.c
>>>> b/xen/arch/ia64/vmx/vmx_fault.c --- a/xen/arch/ia64/vmx/vmx_fault.c
>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/ia64/vmx/vmx_fault.c
>>>> @@ -130,10 +130,8 @@ void vmx_reflect_interruption(u64 ifa, u
>>>> status = handle_fpu_swa(0, regs, isr);
>>>> if (!status)
>>>> return;
>>>> - else if (IA64_RETRY == status) {
>>>> - vcpu_decrement_iip(vcpu);
>>>> + else if (IA64_RETRY == status)
>>>> return;
>>>> - }
>>>> break;
>>>>
>>>> case 29: // IA64_DEBUG_VECTOR
>>>
>>> Hi, Isaku
>>> Why do you think the decrement is useless ? For trap case, the
>>> iip should point to the next instruction instead of the one which
>>> results in the trap. So once need retry, the iip should be back to
>>> the privious one ?
>>
>> Ouch, you are correct.
>> When I compared the handler with Linux one, I was confused.
>
> Hmm, more thoughts.
> Trap means that the instruction was already executed, so backing iip
> means the instruction will be executed twice.
> The result would be wrong. For example, how about if the destination
> register is one of the source register.
> (Or is it safe to execute the instruction twice given that
> FP trap was triggered? I'm not sure about such a corner case. need
> to dig into the specs...)
Oh, that maybe a potential issue we didn't sense it before.
> If we fail to get a bundle in a guest when FP trap,
> we can't reexecute the instruction. We have to inject floating
> point trap into guest.
For HVM, injecting it to guest should be the right way to go.
> Arrg, so FPSWA hypercall has to be implemented correctly?
> What about HVM domain case?
_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel
|
Home