* [PATCH v2 0/2] target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting
@ 2021-05-21 11:19 Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-05-21 11:19 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] " Ilya Leoshkevich
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Leoshkevich @ 2021-05-21 11:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Henderson, David Hildenbrand, Laurent Vivier, Cornelia Huck
Cc: Christian Borntraeger, qemu-s390x, qemu-devel, Ilya Leoshkevich,
Andreas Krebbel
qemu-s390x puts a wrong value into SIGILL's siginfo_t's psw.addr: it
should be a pointer to the instruction following the illegal
instruction, but at the moment it is a pointer to the illegal
instruction itself. This breaks OpenJDK, which relies on this value.
Patch 1 fixes the issue, patch 2 adds a test.
v1: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-05/msg06592.html
v1 -> v2: Use a better buglink (Cornelia), simplify the inline asm
magic in the test and add an explanation (David).
Ilya Leoshkevich (2):
target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting
tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL handling
linux-user/s390x/cpu_loop.c | 6 ++-
target/s390x/excp_helper.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++---------------
target/s390x/internal.h | 1 +
tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target | 1 +
tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
5 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c
--
2.31.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 1/2] target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting
2021-05-21 11:19 [PATCH v2 0/2] target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting Ilya Leoshkevich
@ 2021-05-21 11:19 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-05-21 11:19 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL handling Ilya Leoshkevich
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Leoshkevich @ 2021-05-21 11:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Henderson, David Hildenbrand, Laurent Vivier, Cornelia Huck
Cc: Christian Borntraeger, qemu-s390x, qemu-devel, Ilya Leoshkevich,
Andreas Krebbel
When a s390x CPU attempts to execute an illegal instruction, an
operation exception is recognized. This is a suppressing exception,
which means that the PSW is advanced by the length of the illegal
instruction.
On the real hardware or in qemu-system-s390x the kernel then raises
SIGILL with si_addr pointing to the suppressed instruction and
psw.addr containing the updated PSW.
Unfortunately qemu-s390x sets both to the address of the suppressed
instruction at the moment. Fix by sharing the PSW advancement logic
with qemu-system-s390x and setting si_addr to the address of the
instruction that raised the exception.
Buglink: https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/319
Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
---
linux-user/s390x/cpu_loop.c | 6 +++-
target/s390x/excp_helper.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
target/s390x/internal.h | 1 +
3 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
diff --git a/linux-user/s390x/cpu_loop.c b/linux-user/s390x/cpu_loop.c
index f2d1215fb1..6f5462d4f8 100644
--- a/linux-user/s390x/cpu_loop.c
+++ b/linux-user/s390x/cpu_loop.c
@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
#include "qemu-common.h"
#include "qemu.h"
#include "cpu_loop-common.h"
+#include "internal.h"
/* s390x masks the fault address it reports in si_addr for SIGSEGV and SIGBUS */
#define S390X_FAIL_ADDR_MASK -4096LL
@@ -29,6 +30,7 @@ void cpu_loop(CPUS390XState *env)
{
CPUState *cs = env_cpu(env);
int trapnr, n, sig;
+ target_ulong excp_psw_addr;
target_siginfo_t info;
target_ulong addr;
abi_long ret;
@@ -38,6 +40,7 @@ void cpu_loop(CPUS390XState *env)
trapnr = cpu_exec(cs);
cpu_exec_end(cs);
process_queued_cpu_work(cs);
+ excp_psw_addr = env->psw.addr;
switch (trapnr) {
case EXCP_INTERRUPT:
@@ -66,6 +69,7 @@ void cpu_loop(CPUS390XState *env)
n = TARGET_TRAP_BRKPT;
goto do_signal_pc;
case EXCP_PGM:
+ s390_cpu_program_interrupt_advance_psw(env);
n = env->int_pgm_code;
switch (n) {
case PGM_OPERATION:
@@ -131,7 +135,7 @@ void cpu_loop(CPUS390XState *env)
break;
do_signal_pc:
- addr = env->psw.addr;
+ addr = excp_psw_addr;
do_signal:
info.si_signo = sig;
info.si_errno = 0;
diff --git a/target/s390x/excp_helper.c b/target/s390x/excp_helper.c
index 20625c2c8f..0a323967ae 100644
--- a/target/s390x/excp_helper.c
+++ b/target/s390x/excp_helper.c
@@ -82,6 +82,42 @@ void HELPER(data_exception)(CPUS390XState *env, uint32_t dxc)
tcg_s390_data_exception(env, dxc, GETPC());
}
+void s390_cpu_program_interrupt_advance_psw(CPUS390XState *env)
+{
+ switch (env->int_pgm_code) {
+ case PGM_PER:
+ if (env->per_perc_atmid & PER_CODE_EVENT_NULLIFICATION) {
+ break;
+ }
+ /* FALL THROUGH */
+ case PGM_OPERATION:
+ case PGM_PRIVILEGED:
+ case PGM_EXECUTE:
+ case PGM_PROTECTION:
+ case PGM_ADDRESSING:
+ case PGM_SPECIFICATION:
+ case PGM_DATA:
+ case PGM_FIXPT_OVERFLOW:
+ case PGM_FIXPT_DIVIDE:
+ case PGM_DEC_OVERFLOW:
+ case PGM_DEC_DIVIDE:
+ case PGM_HFP_EXP_OVERFLOW:
+ case PGM_HFP_EXP_UNDERFLOW:
+ case PGM_HFP_SIGNIFICANCE:
+ case PGM_HFP_DIVIDE:
+ case PGM_TRANS_SPEC:
+ case PGM_SPECIAL_OP:
+ case PGM_OPERAND:
+ case PGM_HFP_SQRT:
+ case PGM_PC_TRANS_SPEC:
+ case PGM_ALET_SPEC:
+ case PGM_MONITOR:
+ /* advance the PSW if our exception is not nullifying */
+ env->psw.addr += env->int_pgm_ilen;
+ break;
+ }
+}
+
#if defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY)
void s390_cpu_do_interrupt(CPUState *cs)
@@ -202,38 +238,7 @@ static void do_program_interrupt(CPUS390XState *env)
assert(ilen == 2 || ilen == 4 || ilen == 6);
- switch (env->int_pgm_code) {
- case PGM_PER:
- if (env->per_perc_atmid & PER_CODE_EVENT_NULLIFICATION) {
- break;
- }
- /* FALL THROUGH */
- case PGM_OPERATION:
- case PGM_PRIVILEGED:
- case PGM_EXECUTE:
- case PGM_PROTECTION:
- case PGM_ADDRESSING:
- case PGM_SPECIFICATION:
- case PGM_DATA:
- case PGM_FIXPT_OVERFLOW:
- case PGM_FIXPT_DIVIDE:
- case PGM_DEC_OVERFLOW:
- case PGM_DEC_DIVIDE:
- case PGM_HFP_EXP_OVERFLOW:
- case PGM_HFP_EXP_UNDERFLOW:
- case PGM_HFP_SIGNIFICANCE:
- case PGM_HFP_DIVIDE:
- case PGM_TRANS_SPEC:
- case PGM_SPECIAL_OP:
- case PGM_OPERAND:
- case PGM_HFP_SQRT:
- case PGM_PC_TRANS_SPEC:
- case PGM_ALET_SPEC:
- case PGM_MONITOR:
- /* advance the PSW if our exception is not nullifying */
- env->psw.addr += ilen;
- break;
- }
+ s390_cpu_program_interrupt_advance_psw(env);
qemu_log_mask(CPU_LOG_INT,
"%s: code=0x%x ilen=%d psw: %" PRIx64 " %" PRIx64 "\n",
diff --git a/target/s390x/internal.h b/target/s390x/internal.h
index 11515bb617..9f1665ccbf 100644
--- a/target/s390x/internal.h
+++ b/target/s390x/internal.h
@@ -272,6 +272,7 @@ bool s390_cpu_tlb_fill(CPUState *cs, vaddr address, int size,
void s390x_cpu_do_unaligned_access(CPUState *cs, vaddr addr,
MMUAccessType access_type,
int mmu_idx, uintptr_t retaddr);
+void s390_cpu_program_interrupt_advance_psw(CPUS390XState *cpu);
/* fpu_helper.c */
--
2.31.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 2/2] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL handling
2021-05-21 11:19 [PATCH v2 0/2] target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-05-21 11:19 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] " Ilya Leoshkevich
@ 2021-05-21 11:19 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-05-21 11:22 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-05-21 11:30 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting no-reply
2021-06-01 12:38 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
3 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Leoshkevich @ 2021-05-21 11:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Henderson, David Hildenbrand, Laurent Vivier, Cornelia Huck
Cc: Christian Borntraeger, qemu-s390x, qemu-devel, Ilya Leoshkevich,
Andreas Krebbel
Verify that s390x-specific uc_mcontext.psw.addr is reported correctly.
Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
---
tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target | 1 +
tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 53 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c
diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target b/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
index 241ef28f61..8699d829a5 100644
--- a/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
+++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
@@ -8,3 +8,4 @@ TESTS+=exrl-trtr
TESTS+=pack
TESTS+=mvo
TESTS+=mvc
+TESTS+=sigill
diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c b/tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..aab560b30f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+#include <assert.h>
+#include <signal.h>
+#include <string.h>
+#include <ucontext.h>
+#include <unistd.h>
+
+/*
+ * The labels for the instruction that generates a SIGILL and for the one that
+ * follows it. They could have been defined in a separate .s file, but this
+ * would complicate the build, so use the inline asm instead.
+ */
+
+void expected_si_addr(void);
+void expected_psw_addr(void);
+
+asm(".globl\texpected_si_addr\n"
+ "expected_si_addr:\t.byte\t0x00,0x00\n"
+ "\t.globl\texpected_psw_addr\n"
+ "expected_psw_addr:\tbr\t%r14");
+
+static void handle_signal(int sig, siginfo_t *info, void *ucontext)
+{
+ if (sig != SIGILL) {
+ _exit(1);
+ }
+
+ if (info->si_addr != expected_si_addr) {
+ _exit(2);
+ }
+
+ if (((ucontext_t *)ucontext)->uc_mcontext.psw.addr !=
+ (unsigned long)expected_psw_addr) {
+ _exit(3);
+ }
+}
+
+int main(void)
+{
+ struct sigaction act;
+ int ret;
+
+ memset(&act, 0, sizeof(act));
+ act.sa_sigaction = handle_signal;
+ act.sa_flags = SA_SIGINFO;
+
+ ret = sigaction(SIGILL, &act, NULL);
+ assert(ret == 0);
+
+ expected_si_addr();
+
+ return 0;
+}
--
2.31.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL handling
2021-05-21 11:19 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL handling Ilya Leoshkevich
@ 2021-05-21 11:22 ` David Hildenbrand
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: David Hildenbrand @ 2021-05-21 11:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ilya Leoshkevich, Richard Henderson, Laurent Vivier, Cornelia Huck
Cc: Christian Borntraeger, qemu-s390x, qemu-devel, Andreas Krebbel
On 21.05.21 13:19, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote:
> Verify that s390x-specific uc_mcontext.psw.addr is reported correctly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target | 1 +
> tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 53 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c
>
> diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target b/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
> index 241ef28f61..8699d829a5 100644
> --- a/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
> +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target
> @@ -8,3 +8,4 @@ TESTS+=exrl-trtr
> TESTS+=pack
> TESTS+=mvo
> TESTS+=mvc
> +TESTS+=sigill
> diff --git a/tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c b/tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000000..aab560b30f
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
> +#include <assert.h>
> +#include <signal.h>
> +#include <string.h>
> +#include <ucontext.h>
> +#include <unistd.h>
> +
> +/*
> + * The labels for the instruction that generates a SIGILL and for the one that
> + * follows it. They could have been defined in a separate .s file, but this
> + * would complicate the build, so use the inline asm instead.
> + */
> +
> +void expected_si_addr(void);
> +void expected_psw_addr(void);
> +
> +asm(".globl\texpected_si_addr\n"
> + "expected_si_addr:\t.byte\t0x00,0x00\n"
> + "\t.globl\texpected_psw_addr\n"
> + "expected_psw_addr:\tbr\t%r14");
> +
> +static void handle_signal(int sig, siginfo_t *info, void *ucontext)
> +{
> + if (sig != SIGILL) {
> + _exit(1);
> + }
> +
> + if (info->si_addr != expected_si_addr) {
> + _exit(2);
> + }
> +
> + if (((ucontext_t *)ucontext)->uc_mcontext.psw.addr !=
> + (unsigned long)expected_psw_addr) {
> + _exit(3);
> + }
> +}
> +
> +int main(void)
> +{
> + struct sigaction act;
> + int ret;
> +
> + memset(&act, 0, sizeof(act));
> + act.sa_sigaction = handle_signal;
> + act.sa_flags = SA_SIGINFO;
> +
> + ret = sigaction(SIGILL, &act, NULL);
> + assert(ret == 0);
> +
> + expected_si_addr();
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
>
That makes it much clearer, thanks.
Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting
2021-05-21 11:19 [PATCH v2 0/2] target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-05-21 11:19 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] " Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-05-21 11:19 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL handling Ilya Leoshkevich
@ 2021-05-21 11:30 ` no-reply
2021-06-01 12:38 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
3 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: no-reply @ 2021-05-21 11:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: iii
Cc: iii, david, cohuck, richard.henderson, laurent, qemu-devel,
borntraeger, qemu-s390x, krebbel
Patchew URL: https://patchew.org/QEMU/20210521111908.2843735-1-iii@linux.ibm.com/
Hi,
This series seems to have some coding style problems. See output below for
more information:
Type: series
Message-id: 20210521111908.2843735-1-iii@linux.ibm.com
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/2] target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting
=== TEST SCRIPT BEGIN ===
#!/bin/bash
git rev-parse base > /dev/null || exit 0
git config --local diff.renamelimit 0
git config --local diff.renames True
git config --local diff.algorithm histogram
./scripts/checkpatch.pl --mailback base..
=== TEST SCRIPT END ===
Updating 3c8cf5a9c21ff8782164d1def7f44bd888713384
From https://github.com/patchew-project/qemu
0b5acf8..da9076f master -> master
* [new tag] patchew/20210521111908.2843735-1-iii@linux.ibm.com -> patchew/20210521111908.2843735-1-iii@linux.ibm.com
Switched to a new branch 'test'
195f303 tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL handling
37f7389 target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting
=== OUTPUT BEGIN ===
1/2 Checking commit 37f73891cb22 (target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting)
2/2 Checking commit 195f303f366e (tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL handling)
WARNING: added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating?
#26:
new file mode 100644
ERROR: externs should be avoided in .c files
#43: FILE: tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c:13:
+void expected_si_addr(void);
ERROR: externs should be avoided in .c files
#44: FILE: tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c:14:
+void expected_psw_addr(void);
total: 2 errors, 1 warnings, 56 lines checked
Patch 2/2 has style problems, please review. If any of these errors
are false positives report them to the maintainer, see
CHECKPATCH in MAINTAINERS.
=== OUTPUT END ===
Test command exited with code: 1
The full log is available at
http://patchew.org/logs/20210521111908.2843735-1-iii@linux.ibm.com/testing.checkpatch/?type=message.
---
Email generated automatically by Patchew [https://patchew.org/].
Please send your feedback to patchew-devel@redhat.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting
2021-05-21 11:19 [PATCH v2 0/2] target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting Ilya Leoshkevich
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-05-21 11:30 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting no-reply
@ 2021-06-01 12:38 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-06-01 15:52 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
3 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Leoshkevich @ 2021-06-01 12:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Henderson, David Hildenbrand, Laurent Vivier, Cornelia Huck
Cc: Christian Borntraeger, qemu-s390x, qemu-devel, Andreas Krebbel
On Fri, 2021-05-21 at 13:19 +0200, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote:
> qemu-s390x puts a wrong value into SIGILL's siginfo_t's psw.addr: it
> should be a pointer to the instruction following the illegal
> instruction, but at the moment it is a pointer to the illegal
> instruction itself. This breaks OpenJDK, which relies on this value.
>
> Patch 1 fixes the issue, patch 2 adds a test.
>
> v1:
> https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-05/msg06592.html
> v1 -> v2: Use a better buglink (Cornelia), simplify the inline asm
> magic in the test and add an explanation (David).
>
> Ilya Leoshkevich (2):
> target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting
> tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL handling
>
> linux-user/s390x/cpu_loop.c | 6 ++-
> target/s390x/excp_helper.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++-------------
> --
> target/s390x/internal.h | 1 +
> tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target | 1 +
> tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 5 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c
Hi,
Is there anything I need to do to have this merged?
Regarding the style checker warning: I could move the function
declaration to a separate header, but from my perspective this would
make the test less readable.
Best regards,
Ilya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting
2021-06-01 12:38 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
@ 2021-06-01 15:52 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Ilya Leoshkevich @ 2021-06-01 15:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Henderson, David Hildenbrand, Laurent Vivier, Cornelia Huck
Cc: Christian Borntraeger, qemu-s390x, qemu-devel, Andreas Krebbel
On Tue, 2021-06-01 at 14:38 +0200, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-05-21 at 13:19 +0200, Ilya Leoshkevich wrote:
> > qemu-s390x puts a wrong value into SIGILL's siginfo_t's psw.addr: it
> > should be a pointer to the instruction following the illegal
> > instruction, but at the moment it is a pointer to the illegal
> > instruction itself. This breaks OpenJDK, which relies on this value.
> >
> > Patch 1 fixes the issue, patch 2 adds a test.
> >
> > v1:
> > https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2021-05/msg06592.html
> > v1 -> v2: Use a better buglink (Cornelia), simplify the inline asm
> > magic in the test and add an explanation (David).
> >
> > Ilya Leoshkevich (2):
> > target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting
> > tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL handling
> >
> > linux-user/s390x/cpu_loop.c | 6 ++-
> > target/s390x/excp_helper.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++-------------
> > --
> > target/s390x/internal.h | 1 +
> > tests/tcg/s390x/Makefile.target | 1 +
> > tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 5 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
> > create mode 100644 tests/tcg/s390x/sigill.c
>
> Hi,
>
> Is there anything I need to do to have this merged?
>
> Regarding the style checker warning: I could move the function
> declaration to a separate header, but from my perspective this would
> make the test less readable.
>
> Best regards,
> Ilya
I was just finalizing the similar series for SIGSEGV, when I
realized that the problem that it solves is actually caused by this
one. So please don't merge it yet (in case you were planning to), and
let me send a combined v3.
Best regards,
Ilya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-06-01 15:54 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-05-21 11:19 [PATCH v2 0/2] target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-05-21 11:19 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] " Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-05-21 11:19 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] tests/tcg/s390x: Test SIGILL handling Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-05-21 11:22 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-05-21 11:30 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] target/s390x: Fix SIGILL psw.addr reporting no-reply
2021-06-01 12:38 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
2021-06-01 15:52 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.