From: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Segfault using qemu-system-arm in smc91c111
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2015 18:20:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1441387258.24871.197.camel@linuxfoundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1441370585.24871.166.camel@linuxfoundation.org>
On Fri, 2015-09-04 at 13:43 +0100, Richard Purdie wrote:
> 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().
I just tried an experiment where I put:
if (s->rx_fifo_len >= NUM_PACKETS)
return -1;
into smc91c111_receive() and my reproducer stops reproducing the
problem. I also noticed can_receive() could also have a check on buffer
availability. Would one of these changes be the correct fix here?
(Still working on a reproducer, ended up fixing the other test
continuation issues so the failure is more obvious).
Cheers,
Richard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-04 17:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-04 10:25 [Qemu-devel] Segfault using qemu-system-arm in smc91c111 Richard Purdie
2015-09-04 10:45 ` Peter Maydell
2015-09-04 11:24 ` Richard Purdie
2015-09-04 11:31 ` Peter Maydell
2015-09-04 12:43 ` Richard Purdie
2015-09-04 17:20 ` Richard Purdie [this message]
2015-09-04 17:30 ` Peter Maydell
2015-09-05 20:30 ` Peter Crosthwaite
2015-09-06 14:21 ` Richard Purdie
2015-09-06 18:37 ` Peter Crosthwaite
2015-09-06 23:26 ` Richard Purdie
2015-09-07 0:48 ` Peter Crosthwaite
2015-09-07 7:09 ` Richard Purdie
2015-09-07 18:05 ` Peter Crosthwaite
2015-09-07 7:18 ` Richard Purdie
2015-09-07 7:47 ` Richard Purdie
2015-09-07 9:21 ` Peter Maydell
2015-09-07 18:12 ` Peter Crosthwaite
2015-09-08 9:55 ` Jason Wang
2015-09-07 18:42 ` Peter Maydell
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=1441387258.24871.197.camel@linuxfoundation.org \
--to=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/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).