This patch adds CPU dependent boot mode flag support.
Different CPUs use different bits for the boot mode flag. The constant
MMU_BM is replaced with a variable which is set for the selected CPU.
This patch also removes the MMU flags from being saved in the
translation block code as a result of
Here's a better explanation as to why I initially mixed lock_user() and
copy_to_user():
On Tue, 2007-11-06 at 01:05 +, Paul Brook wrote:
> > access_ok() and lock_user() perform essential functions. lock_user(),
> > however, isn't directly comparable to how the kernel operates and should
> > t
> access_ok() and lock_user() perform essential functions. lock_user(),
> however, isn't directly comparable to how the kernel operates and should
> therefore be encapsulated inside more typical kernel functions such as
> {get,put}_user(), copy_{to,from}_user() and the like. access_ok() and
> loc
On 31.10.2007, at 21:37, Tim Leek wrote:
3. gcc-3.3 won't compile under intel osx. No I didn't try to tweak
it or search extensively online to see if there are work-arounds.
Possibly these exist. I have only copied the last 50-100 lines of
output here.
well, Apple's version of gcc 3.
Thayne Harbaugh wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-11-05 at 22:42 +0100, Fabrice Bellard wrote:
>> Thayne Harbaugh wrote:
>>> On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 20:05 +0100, Fabrice Bellard wrote:
I think that using host addresses in __put_user and __get_user is not
logical. They should use target addresses as get
On Mon, 2007-11-05 at 22:42 +0100, Fabrice Bellard wrote:
> Thayne Harbaugh wrote:
> > On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 20:05 +0100, Fabrice Bellard wrote:
> >> I think that using host addresses in __put_user and __get_user is not
> >> logical. They should use target addresses as get_user and put_user. As
>
Thayne Harbaugh wrote:
> On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 20:05 +0100, Fabrice Bellard wrote:
>> I think that using host addresses in __put_user and __get_user is not
>> logical. They should use target addresses as get_user and put_user. As
>> Paul said, It is not worth mixing get/put/copy and lock/unlock fun
Uhhh, I'm quite uncomfortable now. After sending the emails describing
how everything should be done I realized that I had never reworked my
base patches. All my higher-level patches are sound, but I never
reworked my {get,put}_user() and copy_{to,from}_user() patches to follow
the same pattern.
On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 20:05 +0100, Fabrice Bellard wrote:
> I think that using host addresses in __put_user and __get_user is not
> logical. They should use target addresses as get_user and put_user. As
> Paul said, It is not worth mixing get/put/copy and lock/unlock functions.
Please see the "RF
[sorry if this is the wrong list, but I haven't figured out any public
address where I could send kqemu bug reports and patches]
Currently, both NetBSD and OpenBSD are hanging or crashing when running
on qemu with the kqemu accelerator enabled.
This happens because both systems are using a weird
On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 18:52 +0100, Paul Brook wrote:
> On Saturday 03 November 2007, TJ wrote:
> > I'm building on x86_64 GNU/Linux. There are *lots* of (1053) compiler
> > warnings of the class:
> >
> > warning: cast to pointer from integer of different size
>
> There are at due to the recent EF
On 11/5/07, Paul Brook <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 04 November 2007, Robert Reif wrote:
> > I'm looking at adding more complete support for different sparc32
> > CPUs, MMUs, cache controllers and systems.
> >
> > Each CPU/MMU/cache controller combination is slightly different and
> > re
On 11/5/07, Robert Reif <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm looking at adding more complete support for different sparc32
> CPUs, MMUs, cache controllers and systems.
Great! The only problems I see are that OpenBIOS support needs to be
added for the new CPUs and supporting all CPUs with one image ma
Thomas Bleher wrote:
Thiemo Seufer told me that GPLv2 is fine for qemu, therefore I'd like to
ask that this patch be included in qemu as I posted it (the second
version with the clarified GPLv2 license).
I prefer that a BSD style license is used, especially if the code just
contains wrappers.
* Thomas Bleher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-11-01 16:55]:
> * Thiemo Seufer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-10-31 17:14]:
> > Thomas Bleher wrote:
> > > * Thiemo Seufer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-10-31 13:54]:
> > > > Thomas Bleher wrote:
> > > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > > +++ b/hw/tpm.c
> > > > > @@ -0,0 +1
This is the remaining bit of s390 host support code from your earlier
patch. Could you check if this bit is still needed?
Also, if it does something useful, I suspect that it is incomplete.
gen_setcc duplicates the same logic, wouldn't it need to stay in sync?
Thiemo
--- qemu/target-i386/trans
CVSROOT:/sources/qemu
Module name:qemu
Changes by: Thiemo Seufer 07/11/05 13:27:21
Modified files:
. : configure
Log message:
Add -lpthread flag.
CVSWeb URLs:
http://cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/qemu/configure?cvsroot=qemu&r1=1.166&r2=1.167
CVSROOT:/sources/qemu
Module name:qemu
Changes by: Jocelyn Mayer 07/11/05 13:16:24
Modified files:
. : host-utils.h
Log message:
Fix muls64 prototype to match the actual implementation.
CVSWeb URLs:
http://cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/qemu/host-util
On Sat, 2007-11-03 at 01:18 +, Thiemo Seufer wrote:
> J. Mayer wrote:
> [snip]
> > > > It restricts the letter to the ones historically allowed by Qemu, not to
> > > > anything specific to any architecture or hw platform. What I like in my
> > > > implementation, compared to the strchr..., is
CVSROOT:/sources/qemu
Module name:qemu
Changes by: Jocelyn Mayer 07/11/05 13:01:41
Modified files:
. : host-utils.c
Log message:
Code used by the linux-user targets should not use vl.h.
Include exec.h instead.
CVSWeb URLs:
http://cvs.savanna
Am Thu, 1 Nov 2007 15:24:37 +0200
schrieb "Felipe Contreras" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> I'm also interested in this but so far I've not been able to make it
> work.
>
> Perhaps this would help:
> http://lists.scratchbox.org/pipermail/scratchbox-devel/2007-October/000349.html
Looks interesting. Bu
21 matches
Mail list logo
