From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47590)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>)
	id 1ZXqL1-0005pg-9R
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2015 08:43:28 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>)
	id 1ZXqKy-0001Kb-1T
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2015 08:43:27 -0400
Received: from 5751f4a1.skybroadband.com ([87.81.244.161]:62622
	helo=dan.rpsys.net) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>)
	id 1ZXqKx-0001KS-Mp
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2015 08:43:23 -0400
Message-ID: <1441370585.24871.166.camel@linuxfoundation.org>
From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2015 13:43:05 +0100
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA8ict1SFxpu4yb_y1Rvp6kTZn3xweMF_7Vw1H0Mc-w3iw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1441362357.24871.155.camel@linuxfoundation.org>
	<CAFEAcA874VoaFLDU+5Ai1DgQ8ahgSrh6Xfkg6VSqHwZ0422PSA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1441365880.24871.164.camel@linuxfoundation.org>
	<CAFEAcA8ict1SFxpu4yb_y1Rvp6kTZn3xweMF_7Vw1H0Mc-w3iw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Segfault using qemu-system-arm in smc91c111
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

On Fri, 2015-09-04 at 12:31 +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 4 September 2015 at 12:24, Richard Purdie
> <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > So just based on that, yes, seems that the rx_fifo looks to be
> > overrunning. I can add the asserts but I think it would just confirm
> > this.
> 
> Yes, the point of adding assertions is to confirm a hypothesis.

I've now confirmed that it does indeed trigger the assert in
smc91c111_receive().

> >> Also, do you have a more specific reproduce case so I can try
> >> to replicate the problem here?
> >
> > Not sure how familiar you are with the yocto project?
> 
> I don't really know about the Yocto project, no. What I need
> is a set of instructions I can follow ("download this, run this
> command line", etc) so I can reproduce it on my machine.

I'm running some tests at the moment to see which environments this is
reproducible in and will try and distil reproduction steps based on
that.

Cheers,

Richard