On 31.05.2016 12:29, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 19.05.2016 10:04, Alexander Graf wrote: >> On 05/18/2016 09:01 PM, Thomas Huth wrote: >>> If kvmppc_handle_exit_pr() calls kvmppc_emulate_instruction() to emulate >>> one instruction (in the BOOK3S_INTERRUPT_H_EMUL_ASSIST case), it calls >>> kvmppc_core_queue_program() afterwards if kvmppc_emulate_instruction() >>> returned EMULATE_FAIL, so the guest gets an program interrupt for the >>> illegal opcode. >>> However, the kvmppc_emulate_instruction() also tried to inject a >>> program exception for this already, so the program interrupt gets >>> injected twice and the return address in srr0 gets destroyed. >>> All other callers of kvmppc_emulate_instruction() are also injecting >>> a program interrupt, and since the callers have the right knowledge >>> about the srr1 flags that should be used, it is the function >>> kvmppc_emulate_instruction() that should _not_ inject program >>> interrupts, so remove the kvmppc_core_queue_program() here. >>> >>> This fixes the issue discovered by Laurent Vivier with kvm-unit-tests >>> where the logs are filled with these messages when the test tries >>> to execute an illegal instruction: >>> >>> Couldn't emulate instruction 0x00000000 (op 0 xop 0) >>> kvmppc_handle_exit_pr: emulation at 700 failed (00000000) >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> I'm surprised you're the first one to encounter this :). >> >> Reviewed-by: Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx> > > *ping* > > Paul, could you maybe pick up this patch? ping^2 Thomas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
