qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] linux-user/s390x: signal with SIGFPE on compare-and-t


From: jonathan.albrecht
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] linux-user/s390x: signal with SIGFPE on compare-and-trap
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2021 10:23:12 -0400
User-agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.1.12

On 2021-07-08 1:08 pm, Richard Henderson wrote:
On 7/7/21 6:42 AM, Jonathan Albrecht wrote:
+                sig = TARGET_SIGFPE;
+                if ((n & 0x03) == 0) {
+                    /* An IEEE exception, simulated or otherwise. */
                      if (n & 0x80) {
                          n = TARGET_FPE_FLTINV;
                      } else if (n & 0x40) {
@@ -121,13 +123,12 @@ void cpu_loop(CPUS390XState *env)
                          n = TARGET_FPE_FLTUND;
                      } else if (n & 0x08) {
                          n = TARGET_FPE_FLTRES;
-                    } else {
-                        /* ??? Quantum exception; BFP, DFP error.  */
-                        goto do_sigill_opn;
                      }
-                    sig = TARGET_SIGFPE;
-                    goto do_signal_pc;
+                } else {
+                    /* compare-and-trap */
+                    n = 0;
                  }

Thanks for the review. I should have a v3 ready shortly.

Nearly, but not quite.  Replace the ??? Quantum exception with n = 0,
otherwise si_code will be garbage for that case.

Thx I'll fix that.

The structure of the kernel code is

  if (n != 0) {
    /* do_fp_trap */
    si_code = 0;
    if ((n & 3) == 0) {
      /* select on bits 6 & 7 */
    }
    raise sigfpe w/ si_code
  } else {
    raise sigill
  }

The comment for compare-and-trap is misleading, because there are lots
of entries in "Figure 6-2. Data-exception codes (DXC)" which arrive
there and are not compare-and-trap.

I'll make the comment less specific.

As a general comment, I think a single switch over DXC would be
cleaner for both kernel and qemu.  It seems like giving different
si_code for e.g. "0x40 IEEE division by zero" and "0x43 Simulated IEEE
division by zero" is actively incorrect.

I went over the DXC section and I see what you mean about the si_codes
for simulated IEEE exceptions. I'll plan on handling those the same as
non-simulated IEEE if no objections. Otherwise all non-IEEE will have
si_code == 0 except DXC == 0x00 will still goto do_sigill_opn.


r~



reply via email to

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