From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1IQUeZ-0002sL-FC
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:00:43 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1IQUeU-0002ir-DV
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:00:43 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IQUeU-0002ih-BU
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:00:38 -0400
Received: from sp604003mt.neufgp.fr ([84.96.92.56] helo=smTp.neuf.fr)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <fabrice@bellard.org>) id 1IQUeU-0006Yh-3U
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:00:38 -0400
Received: from [84.102.211.186] by sp604003mt.gpm.neuf.ld
	(Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-5.05 (built Feb 16 2006))
	with ESMTP id <0JNJ00ATMZL94QM2@sp604003mt.gpm.neuf.ld> for
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:58:22 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 22:58:00 +0200
From: Fabrice Bellard <fabrice@bellard.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] CC_DST problem
In-reply-to: <46D59E6B.1000606@suse.de>
Message-id: <46D5DDD8.3080804@bellard.org>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
References: <46D59E6B.1000606@suse.de>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Alexander Graf wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm still trying to implement SVM correctly and hit a serious problem.
> If I set CC_OP to EFLAGS / DYNAMIC after each instruction (so most
> conditional operations are based on EFLAGS) everything works as expected.
> If using CC_OP==CC_OP_EFLAGS only CC_SRC should be used and CC_DST is
> supposed to be completely ignored.
> 
> So I set CC_DST to 0 (this happens when leaving and rejoining the
> virtual machine, so this is the real problem) and if I do that, I get
> funny segmentation faults in x86_64 guest userspace programs running in
> the virtual machine (this is exactly what I see in kvm with my current
> patchset as well), while 32 bit userspace programs simply hang.
> So I guess this is the real problem.
> 
> Is there any logical reason CC_DST could be used with CC_OP==CC_OP_EFLAGS?
> 
> Attached to this email you will find a small patch that triggers this
> problem.
> 
> Thanks for any reply that could help on this,
> 
> Alexander Graf

If you play with the CC_OP logic, it is better to disable the eflags 
optimization code in the translator (optimize_flags() function).

Regarding the implementation for SVM, you can look at how the CC are 
handled in SMM (do_smm_enter and helper_rsm). I see no particular 
problem here.

I suggest to try to suppress the additions in the static translator 
state as I feel most of the SVM intercepts can be tested in helpers 
where speed is not critical.

Regards,

Fabrice.