n Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 10:11:25AM +0300, Roman Bolshakov wrote:
> If interrupts are disabled, STI is inhibiting interrupts for the
> instruction following it. If STI is followed by HLT, the CPU is going to
> handle all pending or new interrupts as soon as HLT is executed.
>
> Test if emulator properly clears inhibition state and allows the
> scenario outlined above.
>
> Cc: Cameron Esfahani <dirty@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Roman Bolshakov <r.bolshakov@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> x86/realmode.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/x86/realmode.c b/x86/realmode.c
> index 31f84d0..3518224 100644
> --- a/x86/realmode.c
> +++ b/x86/realmode.c
> @@ -814,6 +814,26 @@ static void test_int(void)
> report("int 1", 0, 1);
> }
>
> +static void test_sti_inhibit(void)
> +{
> + init_inregs(NULL);
> +
> + *(u32 *)(0x73 * 4) = 0x1000; /* Store IRQ 11 handler in the IDT */
> + *(u8 *)(0x1000) = 0xcf; /* 0x1000 contains an IRET instruction */
> +
> + MK_INSN(sti_inhibit, "cli\n\t"
> + "movw $0x200b, %dx\n\t"
> + "movl $1, %eax\n\t"
> + "outl %eax, %dx\n\t" /* Set IRQ11 */
> + "movl $0, %eax\n\t"
> + "outl %eax, %dx\n\t" /* Clear IRQ11 */
> + "sti\n\t"
> + "hlt\n\t");
> + exec_in_big_real_mode(&insn_sti_inhibit);
> +
> + report("sti inhibit", ~0, 1);
> +}
> +
> static void test_imul(void)
> {
> MK_INSN(imul8_1, "mov $2, %al\n\t"
> @@ -1739,6 +1759,7 @@ void realmode_start(void)
> test_xchg();
> test_iret();
> test_int();
> + test_sti_inhibit();
> test_imul();
> test_mul();
> test_div();
> --
> 2.24.1
>
Hi,
Should I resend the patch?
And this one: https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11449525/ ?
Thanks,
Roman
