[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] target/s390x: Fix SIGILL/SIGFPE/SIGTRAP psw.addr repo
From: |
Laurent Vivier |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] target/s390x: Fix SIGILL/SIGFPE/SIGTRAP psw.addr reporting |
Date: |
Fri, 2 Jul 2021 14:01:47 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 |
Le 02/07/2021 à 12:34, Cornelia Huck a écrit :
> On Wed, Jun 23 2021, Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> qemu-s390x puts a wrong value into SIGILL's siginfo_t's psw.addr: it
>> should be a pointer to the instruction following the illegal
>> instruction, but at the moment it is a pointer to the illegal
>> instruction itself. This breaks OpenJDK, which relies on this value.
>> A similar problem exists for SIGFPE and SIGTRAP.
>>
>> Patch 1 fixes the issue, patch 2 adds a test.
>>
>> v1: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-05/msg06592.html
>> v1 -> v2: Use a better buglink (Cornelia), simplify the inline asm
>> magic in the test and add an explanation (David).
>>
>> v2: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-05/msg06649.html
>> v2 -> v3: Fix SIGSEGV handling (found when trying to run valgrind under
>> qemu-user).
>>
>> v3: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-06/msg00299.html
>> v3 -> v4: Fix compiling the test on Ubuntu 20.04 (Jonathan).
>>
>> v4: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-06/msg05848.html
>> v4 -> v5: Greatly simplify the fix (Ulrich).
>>
>> Note: the compare-and-trap SIGFPE issue is being fixed separately.
>> https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-06/msg05690.html
>>
>> Ilya Leoshkevich (2):
>> target/s390x: Fix SIGILL/SIGFPE/SIGTRAP psw.addr reporting
>> tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL and SIGSEGV handling
>>
>> linux-user/s390x/cpu_loop.c | 5 +
>> tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target | 1 +
>> tests/tcg/s390x/signal.c | 165 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 3 files changed, 171 insertions(+)
>> create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/signal.c
>
> What's the status of this and
> <20210621141452.2045-1-jonathan.albrecht@linux.vnet.ibm.com>? linux-user
> is not really my turf, but it would be sad if this fell through the
> cracks.
>
If from the S390x point of view they are correct, I can collect them via
linux-user.
Thanks,
Laurent