[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-arm] [PATCH for-3.0] accel/tcg: Don't treat invalid TLB entrie
From: |
Laurent Vivier |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-arm] [PATCH for-3.0] accel/tcg: Don't treat invalid TLB entries as needing recheck |
Date: |
Fri, 29 Jun 2018 18:23:26 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 |
Le 29/06/2018 à 18:17, Peter Maydell a écrit :
> In get_page_addr_code() when we check whether the TLB entry
> is marked as TLB_RECHECK, we should not go down that code
> path if the TLB entry is not valid at all (ie the TLB_INVALID
> bit is set).
>
> Reported-by: Laurent Vivier <address@hidden>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <address@hidden>
> ---
> This fixes the abort that Laurent was seeing with his m68k test case.
>
> accel/tcg/cputlb.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/accel/tcg/cputlb.c b/accel/tcg/cputlb.c
> index eebe97dabb7..a55296583b9 100644
> --- a/accel/tcg/cputlb.c
> +++ b/accel/tcg/cputlb.c
> @@ -967,7 +967,8 @@ tb_page_addr_t get_page_addr_code(CPUArchState *env,
> target_ulong addr)
> }
> }
>
> - if (unlikely(env->tlb_table[mmu_idx][index].addr_code & TLB_RECHECK)) {
> + if (unlikely((env->tlb_table[mmu_idx][index].addr_code &
> + (TLB_RECHECK | TLB_INVALID_MASK)) == TLB_RECHECK)) {
> /*
> * This is a TLB_RECHECK access, where the MMU protection
> * covers a smaller range than a target page, and we must
>
Thank you!
Tested-by: Laurent Vivier <address@hidden>