qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

[Qemu-devel] [Bug 1806243] Re: ARM conditional branch after if-then inst


From: Vincent Hamp
Subject: [Qemu-devel] [Bug 1806243] Re: ARM conditional branch after if-then instruction not working
Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2018 15:28:35 -0000

Oh damn it, you're right. Apparently encoding T3 of the branch
instruction inside an IT block is always unpredictable... Guess the
inline assembly version ignores the .w extension and creates some other
encoding that simply works.

I've attached the .elf which is causing GDB to halt.

Currently I'm invoking QEMU GNU MCU (some fork with small CortexM extensions) 
with
qemu-system-gnuarmeclipse -S -s -verbose -semihosting-config 
enable=on,target=native -mcu STM32F407VG --image arm_unpredictable_branch.elf

QEMU GNU MCU is currently at version 2.8.0.

But as I mentioned before I've also tried it with 3.0.0 from the ARCH
repository and both versions did the same thing. I think the only
difference is the "--image" option which translates to "--kernel" in the
original.

** Attachment added: "arm_unpredictable_branch.elf"
   
https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1806243/+attachment/5218154/+files/arm_unpredictable_branch.elf

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of qemu-
devel-ml, which is subscribed to QEMU.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1806243

Title:
  ARM conditional branch after if-then instruction not working

Status in QEMU:
  New

Bug description:
  Hello

  There seems to be an issue with QEMU when debugging if-then condition
  blocks from the thumb2 instruction set. The following snippet runs
  fine during normal execution, but keeps hanging at the conditional
  branch when debugging. The jump at the branch should only be executed
  as long as $r0 is lower than $r1. Problem is that once both are equal,
  the execution is not continued past the branch and the program counter
  never gets popped.

  2000407a:   push    {lr}
  2000407c:   movs    r0, r6
  2000407e:   ldmia   r7!, {r1, r6}
  20004080:   push    {r0, r1}
  20004082:   str.w   r6, [r7, #-4]!
  20004086:   ldr     r6, [sp, #0]
  20004088:   pop     {r0, r1}
  2000408a:   adds    r0, #1
  2000408c:   cmp     r0, r1
  2000408e:   itt     lt
  20004090:   pushlt  {r0, r1}
  20004092:   blt.w   0x20004082      ; unpredictable <IT:lt>  // <-- GDB hangs 
here
  20004096:   pop     {pc}

  I have tried to reproduce the problem with inline assembly but for
  some reason the following example just worked:

  void f() {
    static uint8_t stack[256]{};
    stack[255] = 4;

    asm volatile("\n\t"
                 "push    {lr}"
                 "\n\t"

                 // pre-conditions
                 "movs    r7, %[stack]"
                 "\n\t"
                 "movs    r6, #1"
                 "\n\t"

                 "movs    r0, r6"
                 "\n\t"
                 "ldmia   r7!, {r1, r6}"
                 "\n\t"
                 "push    {r0, r1}"
                 "\n\t"
                 "1:"
                 "\n\t"
                 "str.w   r6, [r7, #-4]!"
                 "\n\t"
                 "ldr     r6, [sp, #0]"
                 "\n\t"
                 "pop     {r0, r1}"
                 "\n\t"
                 "adds    r0, #1"
                 "\n\t"
                 "cmp     r0, r1"
                 "\n\t"
                 "itt     lt"
                 "\n\t"
                 "pushlt  {r0, r1}"
                 "\n\t"

                 // Original instruction
                 //"blt.w   0x20004082"  //   ; unpredictable <IT:lt>

                 // Trying to fake it
                 "blt.w   1b"
                 "\n\t"

                 "pop     {pc}"
                 "\n\t"
                 :
                 : [stack] "r"(&stack[255]));
  }

  The only real major difference I see to the other code snipped is that
  the inline assembly is running from flash memory where as the original
  code runs in ram? Maybe that's a clue somehow?

  Quickly reading through already reported ARM bugs I think this might be 
related:
  https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1364501
  At least the symptoms sound identical.

  
  The versions I'm running are:
  QEMU 3.0.0
  arm-none-eabi-gdb 8.2

  I've also captured some trace output for single stepping from the
  pushlt to the blt.w instruction with the trace arguments unimp,
  guest_errors, op, int, exec.

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/qemu/+bug/1806243/+subscriptions



reply via email to

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