linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Zachary Amsden <zamsden@redhat.com>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, avi@redhat.com,
	mtosatti@redhat.com
Subject: Re: use of setjmp/longjmp in x86 emulator.
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2010 06:13:53 -1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B8BE7C1.40000@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100301091819.GD16909@redhat.com>

On 02/28/2010 11:18 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> I am looking at improving KVM x86 emulator. Current code does not
> handle some special cases correctly (code execution from ROM, ins/outs
> to/from MMIO) and many exception conditions during instruction emulation
> are not handled correctly. There is a lot of code in emulator that is
> there only for exception propagation. Using setjmp/longjmp will be very
> beneficial here as exception condition during instruction execution
> maps very naturally to setjmp/longjmp, so my question is what about
> adding setjmp/longjmp implementation to the kernel, or alternatively,
> if there is a fear that it can be abused, add it locally to emulator.c?
> Note that instruction emulation is always done in process context.
>    

I'm all for radical ideas, but from a pragmatic point of view, you 
shouldn't use longjmp in the kernel.  Seriously bad things are happening 
with it; it leaves local variables undefined, doesn't undo global state 
changes.

So if you:

spin_lock(&s->lock);
if (!s->active)
     longjmp(buf, -1);

... you are broken.  This case can be made very much more complex and 
hard to reason about by using local variables which are reset by the 
longjmp.

Further, it requires use of the volatile keyword to interact properly 
with logic involving more than one variable, and thus, by definition is 
impossible to use in the kernel, which does not implement the volatile 
keyword.  :)


Instead, for this case, use the fact that there is an architecturally 
designed finite number of exceptions that can be processed 
simultaneously.  This means if you queue exceptions to a pending list of 
control-flow interrupting events to be processed, as long as the queue 
is appropriately sized, you will never overflow this queue and never 
require dynamic allocation.  Further, you can then naturally follow the 
exception priority rules at the top-level of the emulator and never need 
to pass back complex exception structures, merely a simple return value 
which indicates whether to return to top-level control logic or continue 
with instruction emulation.  I believe using this style of programming 
will make your need for setjmp/longjmp go away.

Zach

  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-03-01 16:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-03-01  9:18 use of setjmp/longjmp in x86 emulator Gleb Natapov
2010-03-01 12:45 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2010-03-01 12:52   ` Gleb Natapov
2010-03-01 13:17     ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2010-03-01 13:26       ` Gleb Natapov
2010-03-01 19:13         ` john cooper
2010-03-02  7:28           ` Gleb Natapov
2010-03-07  9:00             ` Avi Kivity
2010-03-08 23:11               ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-03-09  6:28                 ` Gleb Natapov
2010-03-01 16:13 ` Zachary Amsden [this message]
2010-03-01 17:47   ` Gleb Natapov
2010-03-01 18:39     ` Zachary Amsden
2010-03-01 18:47       ` Luca Barbieri
2010-03-01 19:03       ` Gleb Natapov
2010-03-01 19:18         ` Zachary Amsden
2010-03-01 22:31           ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-03-01 22:56             ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-03-01 23:34               ` Zachary Amsden
2010-03-01 23:43                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2010-03-02  8:05                 ` Gleb Natapov
2010-03-02  8:49               ` Gleb Natapov
2010-03-07  9:04                 ` Avi Kivity
2010-03-08  0:08                   ` H. Peter Anvin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4B8BE7C1.40000@redhat.com \
    --to=zamsden@redhat.com \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=gleb@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).