On 9/6/19 8:44 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 9/6/19 8:24 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>
> static const MemoryRegionOps notdirty_mem_ops = {
> .write = notdirty_mem_write,
> -.valid.accepts = notdirty_mem_accepts,
> .endianness = DEVICE_NATIVE_ENDIAN,
> .va
On Wed, 4 Sep 2019 at 03:41, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 05:50:56PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > Do you have a backtrace of QEMU from the segfault? I'm having trouble
> > thinking of what the situation is when we'd try to invoke the
> > read handler on io_mem_notdirty...
>
> I've
On 9/6/19 8:24 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
static const MemoryRegionOps notdirty_mem_ops = {
.write = notdirty_mem_write,
-.valid.accepts = notdirty_mem_accepts,
.endianness = DEVICE_NATIVE_ENDIAN,
.valid = {
.min_access_size = 1,
>>
On 9/6/19 3:08 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 9/6/19 3:28 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>> On 9/2/19 3:26 AM, Tony Nguyen wrote:
>>> Existing read rejecting validator was mistakenly cleared.
>>>
>>> Reads dispatched to io_mem_notdirty then segfaults as there is no read
>>> handler.
>>>
>>> Signed-o
On 9/6/19 3:28 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 9/2/19 3:26 AM, Tony Nguyen wrote:
>> Existing read rejecting validator was mistakenly cleared.
>>
>> Reads dispatched to io_mem_notdirty then segfaults as there is no read
>> handler.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tony Nguyen
>> ---
>> exec.c | 2 +-
>
On 9/2/19 3:26 AM, Tony Nguyen wrote:
> Existing read rejecting validator was mistakenly cleared.
>
> Reads dispatched to io_mem_notdirty then segfaults as there is no read
> handler.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tony Nguyen
> ---
> exec.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 05:50:56PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> Do you have a backtrace of QEMU from the segfault? I'm having trouble
> thinking of what the situation is when we'd try to invoke the
> read handler on io_mem_notdirty...
Using tcg-next
https://github.com/rth7680/qemu/commit/c25c283
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 05:50:56PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 17:47, Tony Nguyen wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 11:25:28AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 at 02:36, Tony Nguyen wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Existing read rejecting validator was mista
On Tue, 3 Sep 2019 at 17:47, Tony Nguyen wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 11:25:28AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 at 02:36, Tony Nguyen wrote:
> > >
> > > Existing read rejecting validator was mistakenly cleared.
> > >
> > > Reads dispatched to io_mem_notdirty then segfaul
On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 11:25:28AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 at 02:36, Tony Nguyen wrote:
> >
> > Existing read rejecting validator was mistakenly cleared.
> >
> > Reads dispatched to io_mem_notdirty then segfaults as there is no read
> > handler.
>
> Do you have the commit
On Mon, 2 Sep 2019 at 02:36, Tony Nguyen wrote:
>
> Existing read rejecting validator was mistakenly cleared.
>
> Reads dispatched to io_mem_notdirty then segfaults as there is no read
> handler.
Do you have the commit hash for where we introduced the
bug that this is fixing?
thanks
-- PMM
On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 11:26:47AM +1000, Tony Nguyen wrote:
> Existing read rejecting validator was mistakenly cleared.
>
> Reads dispatched to io_mem_notdirty then segfaults as there is no read
> handler.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tony Nguyen
Reviewed-by: Peter Xu
--
Peter Xu
Existing read rejecting validator was mistakenly cleared.
Reads dispatched to io_mem_notdirty then segfaults as there is no read
handler.
Signed-off-by: Tony Nguyen
---
exec.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/exec.c b/exec.c
index 1df966d17a..05d664541f 100644
13 matches
Mail list logo
