On Wed Jan 25, 2023 at 10:46 AM CET, Laurent Vivier wrote:
> Applied to my linux-user-for-8.0 branch.
Thanks!
On Fri Nov 4, 2022 at 10:53 AM CET, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Splitting this big patch would ease review:
It's only +165/-131, are you sure it really needs to be split?
> 1/ Replace safe_execve() by safe_execveat()
>
> -safe_execve(exec_path, argp, envp))
> +safe_execveat(AT_FDCWD,
References: https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/1007
Signed-off-by: Drew DeVault
---
v3 => v4: implement strace for execveat
linux-user/strace.c| 91 +++---
linux-user/strace.list | 2 +-
linux-user/syscall.c | 203 +
References: https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/1007
Signed-off-by: Drew DeVault
---
v2 => v3:
- Rebase to address the is_proc_myself fix
- Drop the ifdefs
linux-user/syscall.c | 203 ++-
1 file changed, 105 insertions(+), 98 deletions(-)
d
References: https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/1007
Signed-off-by: Drew DeVault
---
linux-user/syscall.c | 204 +++
1 file changed, 111 insertions(+), 93 deletions(-)
diff --git a/linux-user/syscall.c b/linux-user/syscall.c
index f55cdebee5
You're right, that's a much better approach. New patch coming up
shortly.
References: https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/1007
Signed-off-by: Drew DeVault
---
linux-user/syscall.c | 50 ++--
1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/linux-user/syscall.c b/linux-user/syscall.c
index f55cdebee5
On 2019-02-13 11:46 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Reading from the backing file would be correct in your special case
> (because the overlay was only just created and doesn't contain data
> yet), but generally speaking, this would make the disk content
> inconsistent because it would mix newer data from
ckends, but I'm a
little unfamiliar with this code and the refactoring is not minor so I
would like to get feedback from some of the wiser folks on this mailing
list before I sink too much time into this.
Thoughts?
--
Drew DeVault
On 01/15/2015 04:26 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
This fixes a recent Multiboot load regression (see patch 2) that we
noticed while hacking on the advent calendar image for December 24.
These changes all look fine to me.
cc-ing a few people I found in the blame for the relevant files. Mind
taking a look at this patch?
Thanks!
On 11/04/2014 12:49 PM, Drew DeVault wrote:
Ping: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/404885/
Does anyone know someone I can cc on this? This part of the code doesn't
have a dedi
Ping: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/404885/
Does anyone know someone I can cc on this? This part of the code doesn't
have a dedicated maintainer.
On 10/29/2014 11:52 PM, Drew DeVault wrote:
The name is set to "qemu".
Signed-off-by: Drew DeVault
---
For the future, it m
The name is set to "qemu".
Signed-off-by: Drew DeVault
---
For the future, it may be useful to add a command line flag for setting this to
some user-specified value. I also considered naming it "qemu-system-i386" or
"qemu-system-x86_64" (as appropriate), but co
13 matches
Mail list logo
