-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 88
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Test memory boundaries for opcode execution #38
Comments
Co-authored-by: John Adler <[email protected]>
Related issue: FuelLabs/fuel-specs#318
Co-authored-by: John Adler <[email protected]>
Related issue: FuelLabs/fuel-specs#318
Related issue: FuelLabs/fuel-specs#318
Co-authored-by: John Adler <[email protected]>
Related issue: FuelLabs/fuel-specs#318
Co-authored-by: John Adler <[email protected]>
@Dentosal How do you think is this issue actual for us with our current codebase? |
I'm fairly certain that this isn't an issue anymore. However, it would still be simple to refactor the instruction fetch code so that we could be certain. The current version is somewhat convoluted, as it's supposedly optimized by loading two opcodes at once. I presume that since we don't guarantee instruction alignment anyway, a simpler obviously-correct apporach would have the same performance. |
We are to use words as pairs of encoded instructions.
However, jump instructions are half-word. And we also might interrupt a program (e.g. debug) in a half-word
This means that incrementing by word might lead to invalid memory access in case the code is in the memory boundary.
We need to have a test case covering that - and, if applicable, fix the code so no panic occur.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: