[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] Actual TB code doesn't look like what was intended (TCG
From: |
Laurent Desnogues |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] Actual TB code doesn't look like what was intended (TCG issue)? |
Date: |
Fri, 24 Jun 2011 10:14:29 +0200 |
On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 4:44 AM, Max Filippov <address@hidden> wrote:
> Hello guys.
>
> I'm running qemu on x86_64 host.
> It's clean build from git sources dated 2011.05.19, commit
> 1fddfba129f5435c80eda14e8bc23fdb888c7187
> I have the following output from "log trace,op,out_asm":
>
> Trace 0x4000a310 [d0026c92]
> OP:
> ---- 0xd00000c0
> movi_i32 tmp1,$0xfffffff4
> add_i32 tmp0,ar9,tmp1
> qemu_ld32 ar1,tmp0,$0x0
>
> ---- 0xd00000c3
> movi_i32 tmp1,$0xfffffff0
> add_i32 tmp0,ar9,tmp1
> qemu_ld32 ar0,tmp0,$0x0
>
> [...snip...]
[...]
> 0x4000a360: xor %esi,%esi
> 0x4000a362: callq 0x52edc2
[...]
> (gdb) x/25i 0x4000a330
[...]
> 0x4000a360: mov $0x1,%esi
> 0x4000a365: callq 0x52edc2 <__ldl_mmu>
> 0x4000a36a: mov %eax,%ebp
> 0x4000a36c: sub $0x44,%al
> => 0x4000a36e: lea -0x10(%rbx),%esp
> 0x4000a371: mov %ebp,0xc(%r14)
> 0x4000a375: mov %r12d,%esi
> 0x4000a378: mov %r12d,%edi
>
> Please note how the current instruction in gdb differ from what was said in
> OUT. This lea corrupts stack pointer and the next callq generates segfault.
> Could please anyone familiar with TCG take a look at this, or suggest where I
> should look myself?
As Peter hinted, you're not looking at the code you think :-)
Note how your original TCG code does loads:
qemu_ld32 ar1,tmp0,$0x0
That $0x0 will end up in %RSI. It's the mem index used to
distinguish from user and privileged level accesses. In your
examples of host code, in one case it is 0 and in the other
it is 1, so you're definitely not really looking at the same
block in the same running conditions.
HTH,
Laurent
Re: [Qemu-devel] Actual TB code doesn't look like what was intended (TCG issue)?,
Laurent Desnogues <=