qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [PATCH 1/2] log: Add separate debug option for logging invalid memor


From: BALATON Zoltan
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] log: Add separate debug option for logging invalid memory accesses
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 17:36:54 +0100 (CET)

On Mon, 13 Feb 2023, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 13/2/23 15:58, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 13/2/23 15:47, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2023, Peter Xu wrote:
On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 12:41:29PM +0100, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 07/02/2023 17.33, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jan 2023, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jan 2023, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
Currently -d guest_errors enables logging of different invalid actions
by the guest such as misusing hardware, accessing missing features or
invalid memory areas.

- misusing hardware => LOG_GUEST_ERROR
- accessing missing features => LOG_UNIMP
- invalid memory areas => depending on the bus bridge, can be:

 #define MEMTX_OK              0
 #define MEMTX_ERROR          (1U << 0) /* device returned an error */
 #define MEMTX_DECODE_ERROR   (1U << 1) /* nothing at that address */
 #define MEMTX_ACCESS_ERROR   (1U << 2) /* access denied */

The memory access logging can be quite verbose
which obscures the other messages enabled by this debug switch so
separate it by adding a new -d memaccess option to make it possible to
control it independently of other guest error logs.

Signed-off-by: BALATON Zoltan <balaton@eik.bme.hu>

Ping? Could somebody review and pick it up please?

Ping?

Patch makes sense to me and looks fine, so:

Reviewed-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>

... I think this should go via one of the "Memory API" maintainers branches?
Paolo? Peter? David?

Paolo normally does the pull, I assume that'll still be the case.  The
patch looks good to me if Phil's comment will be addressed on merging with
the old mask, which makes sense to me:

Keeping the old mask kind of defies the purpose. I've tried to explain that in the commit message

It is hard to justify we need a new mask and scripts have to adapt to
your new format. I assume you can not use trace-event because you want
this logging available in a RELEASE build, right?

Guest errors are useful in a release build, unassigned access probably less so but since I want to separate them from guest_errors I don't see how logging mem access via trace would be any different for your concerns.

Regards,
BALATON Zoltan

reply via email to

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