On 9/21/20 9:42 PM, Douglas Crosher wrote: > > The cpu_exec_step_atomic() function is called with the cpu->running > clear and proceeds to run target code without setting this flag. If > this target code generates an exception then handle_cpu_signal() will > unnecessarily abort. > > For example if atomic code generates a memory protection fault. > > This patch at least sets and clears this running flag. > > The related code paths look rather convoluted and it is not immediately clear > that this patch comprehensively addresses the issue, but it might at least > direct people to a problem, and it might be an incremental improvement, and it > gets some code running here. The patch adds some assertions to help detect > other cases. > > Signed-off-by: Douglas Crosher <dtc-ubu...@scieneer.com>
Sorry this got overlooked, but better late than never. Yes, this looks right, thanks. Queued to tcg-next. r~
