It's very easy for the CPU specific has_work() implementation
and the logic in ppc_hw_interrupt() to be subtly out of sync.
This can occasionally allow a CPU to wakeup from a PM state
and resume executing past the PM instruction when it should
resume at the 0x100 vector.
This detects if it happens and aborts, making it a lot easier
to catch such bugs when testing rather than chasing obscure
guest misbehaviour.
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Signed-off-by: Cédric Le Goater <clg@kaod.org>
Reviewed-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Message-Id: <
20190215161648.9600-8-clg@kaod.org>
Signed-off-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
return;
}
}
+
+ if (env->resume_as_sreset) {
+ /*
+ * This is a bug ! It means that has_work took us out of halt without
+ * anything to deliver while in a PM state that requires getting
+ * out via a 0x100
+ *
+ * This means we will incorrectly execute past the power management
+ * instruction instead of triggering a reset.
+ *
+ * It generally means a discrepancy between the wakup conditions in the
+ * processor has_work implementation and the logic in this function.
+ */
+ cpu_abort(CPU(ppc_env_get_cpu(env)),
+ "Wakeup from PM state but interrupt Undelivered");
+ }
}
void ppc_cpu_do_system_reset(CPUState *cs)