From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34275)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1VHxiC-0007lN-TI
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 11:12:46 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1VHxi7-0004UZ-Bi
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 11:12:40 -0400
Received: from mail-ve0-x231.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400c:c01::231]:48206)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rth7680@gmail.com>) id 1VHxi7-0004US-77
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 11:12:35 -0400
Received: by mail-ve0-f177.google.com with SMTP id db12so1662229veb.8
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Fri, 06 Sep 2013 08:12:34 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Richard Henderson <rth7680@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5229F0DE.7040308@twiddle.net>
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2013 08:12:30 -0700
From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <5228EB17.4050209@weilnetz.de>
	<CAFEAcA-vgr53Q7bMuCEuvaO1KbPARsbeHAnF+cmOx5ALsdGVug@mail.gmail.com>
	<52295FD4.2030207@weilnetz.de>
In-Reply-To: <52295FD4.2030207@weilnetz.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Bug] qemu-sparc64 broken
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: Stefan Weil <sw@weilnetz.de>
Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

On 09/05/2013 09:53 PM, Stefan Weil wrote:
> Am 05.09.2013 23:32, schrieb Peter Maydell:
>> On 5 September 2013 21:35, Stefan Weil <sw@weilnetz.de> wrote:
>>> In a first analysis of this, I noticed that it is impossible to run
>>> qemu-sparc64
>>> under gdb (raised fatal signal).
>> You probably just need to let the signals go through to
>> the target... I noticed that it had a tendency to do lots
>> of (presumably safely handled) segfaulting while running;
>> didn't look at why this happens.
> 
> After lots of SIGSEGV, the program indeed finishes successfully,
> so my report was wrong - SIGSEGV is not a fatal signal for sparc64.
> That's interesting - thank you for this information.

It's not just sparc64.

That's changed page detection, for determining when to invalidate
translation blocks.  For self-modifying code, and more.


r~