> The patch summary should probably be something along the lines of
"powerpc/sstep: fix switch fall-through when analysing malformed rld*
instructions" or similar. The rest of the message should have the more
specific details of the bug you're fixing.
>
> In general, we always mention the affected
On 27/01/16 16:29, oliver wrote:
Is there anywhere else in the sstep code that deals well with malformed
instructions?
When you break out of the switch the opcode type is marked as unknown
and when further attempts to parse the instruction fail it returns zero
to indicate failure. Also, many o
On 25/01/16 17:55, Oliver O'Halloran wrote:
I think this bug can only be triggered if the instruction to
simulate is malformed. The switch in the else case only handles
the zero and one case, but it extracts bits 4:1 from the
instruction word so it may be other values. It's pretty minor, but
a bu
I think this bug can only be triggered if the instruction to
simulate is malformed. The switch in the else case only handles
the zero and one case, but it extracts bits 4:1 from the
instruction word so it may be other values. It's pretty minor, but
a bug is a bug.
Signed-off-by: Oliver O'Halloran
