On 09/08/2016 01:38 AM, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> + } else if (r == EXCP_ATOMIC) {
>> > + /* ??? When we begin running cpus in parallel, we should
>> > + stop all cpus, clear parallel_cpus, and interpret a
>> > + single insn with cpu_exec_step. In the meantime,
>> > + we should never get here. */
>> > + abort();
> Pranith has been hitting this abort in the latest merged tree with MTTCG
> but I'm a little unclear how it got here. So is the plan the MTTCG
> thread function should do a step_atomic a-la user mode but we'll never
> get here in the single threaded case?
>
Yes, that's the plan. I guess I could have filled in that blank, but I see
that I haven't even done that in the v3 patchset.
r~
