> From: Frederic Konrad [mailto:fred.kon...@greensocs.com] > On 23/10/2014 07:57, Pavel Dovgaluk wrote: > >> From: Frederic Konrad [mailto:fred.kon...@greensocs.com] > >> On 22/10/2014 13:38, Pavel Dovgalyuk wrote: > >> > >> Hi Pavel, > >>> This patch fixes instructions counting when execution is stopped on > >>> breakpoint (e.g. set from gdb). Without a patch extra instruction is > >>> translated > >>> and icount is incremented by invalid value (which equals to number of > >>> executed instructions + 1). > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Dovgalyuk <pavel.dovga...@ispras.ru> > >>> --- > >>> target-i386/translate.c | 3 ++- > >>> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/target-i386/translate.c b/target-i386/translate.c > >>> index 1284173..193cf9f 100644 > >>> --- a/target-i386/translate.c > >>> +++ b/target-i386/translate.c > >>> @@ -8000,7 +8000,7 @@ static inline void > >>> gen_intermediate_code_internal(X86CPU *cpu, > >>> if (bp->pc == pc_ptr && > >>> !((bp->flags & BP_CPU) && (tb->flags & > >>> HF_RF_MASK))) { > >>> gen_debug(dc, pc_ptr - dc->cs_base); > >>> - break; > >>> + goto done_generating; > >> This makes sense to me. > >> But I don't see why you don't just "break" like the other instruction in > >> this loop? > > Single break will just exit the breakpoints iteration loop. I'll need an > > additional flag > > to break the translation loop. ARM does the same thing, anyway :) > > Yes that's what I mentioned. > > > >>> } > >>> } > >>> } > >>> @@ -8049,6 +8049,7 @@ static inline void > >>> gen_intermediate_code_internal(X86CPU *cpu, > >>> break; > >>> } > >>> } > >>> +done_generating: > >>> if (tb->cflags & CF_LAST_IO) > >>> gen_io_end(); > >> Is there any reason why you don't jump over this two lines in case of a > >> breakpoint? > > Shouldn't we switch off can_do_io flag if it was switched on? > > Yes but can we switch on can_do_io if we have a breakpoint? > > The code is not shown in this patch but there is: > > if (num_insns + 1 == max_insns && (tb->cflags & CF_LAST_IO)) > gen_io_start(); > > I think you can't reach this code if you exit the translation loop?
This is not the only gen_io_start call. It is called from some of the instructions' translation functions, that could precede the breakpoint. Pavel Dovgalyuk
