qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bob Breuer <breuerr@mc.net>
To: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Cc: qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
	Artyom Tarasenko <atar4qemu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: phys_page_find bug?
Date: Sun, 09 Jan 2011 21:57:17 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D2A839D.2050407@mc.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimKfUMg7CNb64vWYZhmxafk=eVtyXJQSG4txnuG@mail.gmail.com>

Blue Swirl wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Artyom Tarasenko <atar4qemu@gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Artyom Tarasenko
>> <atar4qemu@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>     
>>> phys_page_find (exec.c) returns sometimes a page for addresses where
>>> nothing is connected.
>>>
>>> One example, done with qemu-system-sparc -M SS-20
>>>
>>> ok f13ffff0 2f spacec@ .
>>>
>>> // The address translates correctly, in cpu_physical_memory_rw
>>> // addr== 0xff13ffff0 (where nothing is connected)
>>> // but then phys_page_find returns a nonzero and produces
>>>
>>> Unassigned mem read access of 1 byte to 0000000ff15ffff0 from xxxxx
>>>
>>> (note the "5" in the line above where "3" is expected)
>>>
>>> I wonder if this is only true for non-wired addresses, or whether
>>> phys_page_find can also
>>> find wrong pages for the addresses where something is connected?
>>>
>>> Or is my assumption is wrong and phys_page_find can return a page for
>>> not-connected
>>> addresses and the bug is actually in cpu_physical_memory_rw ?
>>>
>>> Is the qemu algorithm of working with the physical address space
>>> described somewhere?
>>>       
>> I tried to switch devices off and found that the bug is triggered by
>> registering escc.
>> It's harder to debug without escc, so I can't tell whether something
>> else is causing
>> the problem too.
>>
>> Is escc addressing somehow special?
>>     
>
> I don't think so, except that it lies close to the top of the physical
> address space.
>
>   
>>> Is the qemu algorithm of working with the physical address space described somewhere?
>>>       
>> I guess no one knows it anymore, since no-one cared to answer within a
>> half year :-/.
>>     
>
> There's of course good old exec.c, plenty of code and even some comments. ;-)
>   

You can also see this in SS-20 when OBP probes all the sbus slots.  Slot
2 with the tcx graphics shows an unexpected address:
Unassigned mem read access of 1 byte to 0000000e00000000 from ffd3f5e4
Unassigned mem read access of 1 byte to 0000000e10000000 from ffd3f5e4
Unassigned mem read access of 1 byte to 0000000020200000 from ffd3f5e4
Unassigned mem read access of 1 byte to 0000000e30000000 from ffd3f5e4

The 0202 should be e200 instead.

There's two bugs in phys_page_find_alloc().  When the bottom level L2
table is populated with IO_MEM_UNASSIGNED, region_offset is then used
for reporting the physical address.  First, region_offset may not be
aligned to the base address of the L2 region.  And second, region_offset
won't hold the full 36-bit address on a 32-bit host.

It seems that both can be fixed by returning NULL for unassigned
addresses from phys_page_find().  All callers already handle a NULL
return value.  Would this allow any further optimizations to be made?

Here's a patch to try:

diff --git a/exec.c b/exec.c
index 49c28b1..77b49c8 100644
--- a/exec.c
+++ b/exec.c
@@ -434,7 +434,11 @@ static PhysPageDesc
*phys_page_find_alloc(target_phys_addr_t index, int alloc)
 
 static inline PhysPageDesc *phys_page_find(target_phys_addr_t index)
 {
-    return phys_page_find_alloc(index, 0);
+    PhysPageDesc *pd = phys_page_find_alloc(index, 0);
+    if (pd && pd->phys_offset == IO_MEM_UNASSIGNED) {
+        return NULL;
+    }
+    return pd;
 }
 
 static void tlb_protect_code(ram_addr_t ram_addr);

  reply	other threads:[~2011-01-10  3:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-05-07 16:26 [Qemu-devel] phys_page_find bug? Artyom Tarasenko
2010-05-20 20:00 ` [Qemu-devel] " Artyom Tarasenko
2010-11-08 18:55 ` Artyom Tarasenko
2010-11-09 17:53   ` Blue Swirl
2011-01-10  3:57     ` Bob Breuer [this message]
2011-01-10 21:39       ` Blue Swirl
2011-01-11  6:49         ` Bob Breuer
2011-01-11  9:22         ` Artyom Tarasenko
2011-01-11 15:46           ` Bob Breuer
2011-02-04 11:44       ` Artyom Tarasenko

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=4D2A839D.2050407@mc.net \
    --to=breuerr@mc.net \
    --cc=atar4qemu@gmail.com \
    --cc=blauwirbel@gmail.com \
    --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).