On 6 January 2017 at 14:35, Seraphime Kirkovski wrote:
> In terms of implementation, I find it would be better to extract the
> __kernel_cmpxchg code in a separate function. On the one hand, this
> would avoid code duplication or strange gotos and make do_kernel_trap
> more readable. On the other
,qemu-arm
Bcc:
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RESEND PATCH] target-arm/abi32: check for
segfault in do_kernel_trap
Reply-To: In-Reply-To:
Hi Peter,
thanks for the feedback.
On Thu, Jan 05, 2017 at 02:42:38PM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> If you compare what happens with this segv code w
On 2 January 2017 at 12:44, Seraphime Kirkovski wrote:
> Currently, the cmpxchg implementation tests whether the destination address
> is readable:
> - if it is, we read the value and continue with the comparison
> - if isn't, i.e. access to addr would segfault, we assume that src != dest
>
Currently, the cmpxchg implementation tests whether the destination address
is readable:
- if it is, we read the value and continue with the comparison
- if isn't, i.e. access to addr would segfault, we assume that src != dest
rather than queuing a SIGSEGV.
The same problem exists in the c
