[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] target: i386: Check float overflow about register stack
From: |
Chen Gang |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] target: i386: Check float overflow about register stack |
Date: |
Fri, 21 Feb 2020 22:09:11 +0800 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 |
On 2020/2/21 下午4:58, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 21/02/20 04:45, address@hidden wrote:
>> static inline void fpush(CPUX86State *env)
>> {
>> - env->fpstt = (env->fpstt - 1) & 7;
>> - env->fptags[env->fpstt] = 0; /* validate stack entry */
>> + set_fpstt(env, env->fpstt - 1, false, true);
>
> On overflow fpstt is ~0, so this does:
>
> env->foverflow = true;
> env->fpstt = 7;
> env->fptags[7] = 0; /* validate stack entry */
>
> Is this correct? You are going to set ST0 so the register should not be
> marked empty.
>
Originally, I wanted to add foverflow to mark the stack overflow only,
and kept another things no touch.
But I think what you said above is correct, for me, if fpush/f[i]ld*_STO
are overflow, the env->fpstt, env->fpregs and env->fptags should be kept
no touch, and foverflow is set true, so there is no negative effect.
Welcome your idea.
>> void helper_fdecstp(CPUX86State *env)
>> {
>> - env->fpstt = (env->fpstt - 1) & 7;
>> + set_fpstt(env, env->fpstt - 1, false, false);
>
> This is clearing env->foverflow. But after 8 consecutive fdecstp or
> fincstp the result of FXAM should not change.
>
>> env->fpus &= ~0x4700;
>> }
>>
>> void helper_fincstp(CPUX86State *env)
>> {
>> - env->fpstt = (env->fpstt + 1) & 7;
>> + set_fpstt(env, env->fpstt + 1, true, false);
>
> Same here.
>
OK. thanks.
Now if foverflow is only for fpush/f[i]ld*_ST0, I guess fincstp/fdecstp
can clear foverflow. The env->fptags are only for fpop, which keep no
touch in fincstp/fdecstp.
> The actual bug is hinted in helper_fxam_ST0:
>
> /* XXX: test fptags too */
>
> I think the correct fix should be something like
>
> diff --git a/target/i386/fpu_helper.c b/target/i386/fpu_helper.c
> index 99f28f267f..792a128a6d 100644
> --- a/target/i386/fpu_helper.c
> +++ b/target/i386/fpu_helper.c
> @@ -991,7 +991,11 @@ void helper_fxam_ST0(CPUX86State *env)
> env->fpus |= 0x200; /* C1 <-- 1 */
> }
>
> - /* XXX: test fptags too */
> + if (env->fptags[env->fpstt]) {
> + env->fpus |= 0x4100; /* Empty */
> + return;
> + }
> +
For fpop overflow, this fix is enough, but for me, we still need
foverflow to check fpush/fld*_ST0 overflow.
Don't you think we need check fpush/f[i]ld*_ST0 overflow?
Thanks
- [PATCH] target: i386: Check float overflow about register stack, chengang, 2020/02/20
- Re: [PATCH] target: i386: Check float overflow about register stack, Paolo Bonzini, 2020/02/21
- Re: [PATCH] target: i386: Check float overflow about register stack,
Chen Gang <=
- Re: [PATCH] target: i386: Check float overflow about register stack, Paolo Bonzini, 2020/02/21
- Re: [PATCH] target: i386: Check float overflow about register stack, Chen Gang, 2020/02/21
- Re: [PATCH] target: i386: Check float overflow about register stack, Chen Gang, 2020/02/21
- Re: [PATCH] target: i386: Check float overflow about register stack, Paolo Bonzini, 2020/02/22
- Re: [PATCH] target: i386: Check float overflow about register stack, Chen Gang, 2020/02/22
- Re: [PATCH] target: i386: Check float overflow about register stack, Paolo Bonzini, 2020/02/24
- Re: [PATCH] target: i386: Check float overflow about register stack, Chen Gang, 2020/02/24