On Tue, Dec 08, 2015 at 09:57:21AM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote:
> Hello!
>
> > I messed up the "load into xzr" test royally in the last attached patch.
> > It was quite wrong.
>
> Yes, because "mov %0, xzr" is not trapped.
>
> > I have now tested
> >
> > asm volatile(
> > "str %3,
Hello!
> I messed up the "load into xzr" test royally in the last attached patch.
> It was quite wrong.
Yes, because "mov %0, xzr" is not trapped.
> I have now tested
>
> asm volatile(
> "str %3, [%1]\n\t"
> "ldr wzr, [%1]\n\t"
> "str wzr, [%2]\n\t"
> "ldr %0, [%2]\n\t"
Hello!
> But, if Pavel doesn't
> mind trying them out on his system, then it'd be good to know if they
> reproduce there. I'd like to find out if it's a test case problem or
> something else strange going on with environments.
Does not build, applied to master:
--- cut ---
Hello!
> FYI, I tried writing test cases for this issue with kvm-unit-tests. The
> issue didn't reproduce for me. It's quite possible my test cases are
> flawed, so I'm not making any claims about the validity of the series
This is indeed very interesting, so i'll take a look at it.
For now
Hello!
> FYI, I tried writing test cases for this issue with kvm-unit-tests. The
> issue didn't reproduce for me. It's quite possible my test cases are
> flawed
Indeed they are, a very little thing fell through again... :)
It's not just SP, it's SP_EL0. And you never initialize it to anything
On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 04:36:31PM -0600, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 11:36:28AM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > > FYI, I tried writing test cases for this issue with kvm-unit-tests. The
> > > issue didn't reproduce for me. It's quite possible my test cases are
> >
On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 11:47:44AM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote:
> Hello!
>
> > But, if Pavel doesn't
> > mind trying them out on his system, then it'd be good to know if they
> > reproduce there. I'd like to find out if it's a test case problem or
> > something else strange going on with
On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 12:48:12PM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote:
> Hello!
>
> > FYI, I tried writing test cases for this issue with kvm-unit-tests. The
> > issue didn't reproduce for me. It's quite possible my test cases are
> > flawed
>
> Indeed they are, a very little thing fell through again...
On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 03:58:11PM -0600, Andrew Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 12:48:12PM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > > FYI, I tried writing test cases for this issue with kvm-unit-tests. The
> > > issue didn't reproduce for me. It's quite possible my test cases are
> >
On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 11:36:28AM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote:
> Hello!
>
> > FYI, I tried writing test cases for this issue with kvm-unit-tests. The
> > issue didn't reproduce for me. It's quite possible my test cases are
> > flawed, so I'm not making any claims about the validity of the series
>
On Fri, Dec 04, 2015 at 03:03:10PM +0300, Pavel Fedin wrote:
> ARM64 CPU has zero register which is read-only, with a value of 0.
> However, KVM currently incorrectly recognizes it being SP (because
> Rt == 31, and in struct user_pt_regs 'regs' array is followed by SP),
> resulting in invalid
11 matches
Mail list logo
