qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] Call for testing QEMU aarch64-linux-user emulation


From: Peter Maydell
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Call for testing QEMU aarch64-linux-user emulation
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 17:17:58 +0000

On 28 February 2014 17:08, Alex Bennée <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> Peter Maydell <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> On 28 February 2014 14:27, Alexander Graf <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> Could we check the instruction at the sognaling pc and check
>>> if it's a known syscall instruction? No need to replace glibc
>>> wrappers then.
>>
>> No, because the behaviour we want for "started handling
>> syscall in qemu" through to "PC anything up to but not
>> including the syscall insn" is "back out and take signal
>> then try again", which means we need to be able to unwind
>> anything we were doing. If we (effectively) longjmp out of
>> the middle of glibc we're liable to leave locked mutexes
>> and otherwise mess up glibc internals.
>
> The other option is roll the real PC forward until you know you are at a
> point that everything is in a known state - in this case a labelled
> syscall instruction.

I don't see how rolling the host PC forward would work.
We can't take the guest signal where we are, we can't
go forward because that would imply executing the host
syscall (which might now block): the only thing we
can do is roll back to a point where we can make it
appear we hadn't executed the guest syscall insn yet,
and then take the guest signal.

Masking signals doesn't work in general because you
need the signal to be unblocked while you do the
host syscall (so it can correctly return EINTR if
the signal comes in while it's doing stuff), and
there's no way to atomically unblock-and-do-syscall
(and certainly no way to do that if your syscall is
buried inside glibc).

thanks
-- PMM



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]