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 09:18:56 -1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B8C1320.6060602@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100301190341.GD12867@redhat.com>
On 03/01/2010 09:03 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 08:39:49AM -1000, Zachary Amsden wrote:
>
>
>> Anything that can generate exceptions is going to need logic to
>> handle error cases anyway... the depth can not be that bad.
>> Especially if you structure it so as to optimize for tail calling.
>>
>>
> Tail call is not what usually happens. Usually emulation goes like this:
> if (check some conditions) {
> queue exception A
> return exception queued
> }
> if (check other conditions) {
> queue exception B
> return exception queued
> }
> do some emulation
> try to read guest memory
> if (read failed) {
> queue exception C
> return exception queued
> }
> if (read needs exit to userspace for device emulation)
> return please go out and retrieve me the data
>
> continue emulation
> try to write guest memory
> if (write failed) {
> queue exception C
> return exception queued
> }
> if (write needs exit to userspace for device emulation)
> return please go out and process the data
>
> emulate some more.
>
> return emulation done
>
It's going to be ugly to emulate segmentation, NX and write protect
support without hardware to do this checking for you, but it's just what
you have to do in this slow path - tedious, fully specified emulation.
Just because it's tedious doesn't mean we need to use setjmp / longjmp.
Throw / catch might be effective, but it's still pretty bizarre to do
tricks like that in C.
Zach
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-01 19:19 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
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 [this message]
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=4B8C1320.6060602@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).