On Wednesday 27 December 2006 11:24 am, Ely Soto wrote:
Excellent, I had encountered that bug earlier on when trying to debug
using workbench.
Are you guys developing a BSP for qemu?
I have a partially working one.
I'm poking at something like that.
http://landley.net/code/firmware
On Tuesday 31 October 2006 10:22 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
and glue them together like we do with dyngen. However once you've done
that you've implemented most of what's needed for fully dynamic qops, so
it doesn't really seem worth it.
I missed a curve. What's fully dynamic qops?
On Monday 23 October 2006 2:37 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
Better to just teach qemu how to generate code.
In fact I've already done most of the infrastructure (and a fair amount
of the legwork) for this. The only major missing function is code to do
softmmu load/store ops.
On Tuesday 31 October 2006 2:02 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
As an example take the arm instruction
add, r0, r1, r2, lsl #2
This is equivalent to the C expression
r0 = r1 + (r2 2)
...
When fully converted to the new system this would become:
int tmp = gen_new_qreg(); /* Allocate a
On Tuesday 31 October 2006 5:08 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
On Tuesday 31 October 2006 20:41, Rob Landley wrote:
Welcome to Stupid Question Theatre! With your host, Paul Brook. Today's
contestant is: Rob Landley. How dumb will it get?
Bonus round!
I thought what you were doing was replacing
On Tuesday 31 October 2006 7:29 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
Actually it sounds additive rather than multiplicative. Does each target
have an entirely unrelated set of ops, or is there a shared set of
primitive ops plus some oddballs?
The shared set of primitive ops is basically qops :-)
You
On Monday 30 October 2006 9:56 am, Paul Brook wrote:
On Monday 30 October 2006 04:35, Rob Landley wrote:
On Monday 23 October 2006 1:58 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
Although, all told, it would seem to me that what might be called for
here is a new gcc target. A gcc target specifically
On Monday 30 October 2006 8:04 am, Jens Arm wrote:
Hi
If I try to start xubuntu/ubuntu (6.10) in qemu from cdrom
the isolinux 3.11 says Loading... but can not change to graphic mode.
How can I start ubuntu in qemu?
Are you trying the x86-64 version, or the x86 version? I haven't been
On Monday 23 October 2006 1:58 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
Although, all told, it would seem to me that what might be called for
here is a new gcc target. A gcc target specifically for generating qemu
code. That would just simply generate whatever qemu wanted for function
postamble.
Better
On Friday 27 October 2006 7:09 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
It has been a really long time I have been working on a broken system
that did not default to signed.
The only thing that is broken is your knowlege of C.
Okay.
And what system did you encounter this behaviour on?
Common
On Saturday 28 October 2006 6:46 am, Martin Guy wrote:
gcc on ARM systems default to unsigned. The C standard specifically
states that char is either signed or unsigned at the whim of the
implementor
Or, more to the point, at the behest of the machine architecture.
Having to generate
On Wednesday 25 October 2006 11:01 am, Paul Brook wrote:
Oh, c'mon, Rob! I really didn't want to ask Paul Brook that, but
sure you'll fix my cluelessness right here, right now - tell me, tell me,
why Linux has dynamic-loadable modules support, which clueless passers-by
like me call
On Thursday 26 October 2006 3:23 am, KazuyaMatsunaga wrote:
Hello,
It is impolite to write an unexpected letter.
Compared to the mountains of spam I get every day? Not really. :)
I am a college student in
Japan. I belong to information processing system laboratory, and I work on
On Wednesday 27 September 2006 4:27 am, Martin Guy wrote:
There are some statistics at freaknet.org/martin/QEMU for various
types of x86 processor, but giving only BogoMIPS, which are way
overrated.
I presume this is cos QEMU translates the kernel speed test loop once
then runs it as x86
On Tuesday 24 October 2006 8:24 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
ColdFire is the only target that uses it exclusively. Arm is currently a
hybrid of dyngen and the new backend. So is i386, to a lesser extent.
Other targets have minimal changes necessary to make them work.
Ok.
Do you have a quick
On Monday 23 October 2006 7:33 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
My intention is that a machine config file would remove the motherboard
bits
altogether. ie. the config file describes everything that pc_init_1 does.
The
first half of pc.c would remain because that's device emulation.
Sounds highly
On Monday 23 October 2006 8:12 pm, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
Yes, machine config apparently would be a hierarchical structure,
with cross-references. And well, there's an industrial standard to
represent that - XML.
There's an interesting sort of natural selection at work in open source.
On Monday 23 October 2006 9:38 pm, Paul Sokolovsky wrote:
Maybe. But where are new chips in qemu? Why there're still only 2
ARM boards? How do I stick wi-fi card in one of them? So the concern
is not just if it's easy to add new devices or not, but if there're means
to actually support
On Tuesday 24 October 2006 6:47 am, Flavio Visentin wrote:
At this point it's really cleaner and maybe simpler to use XML
Have you ever implemented a validating XML parser? I have. It only
_looks_ clean and simple.
Rob
--
Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add,
On Monday 23 October 2006 2:37 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
It turn out that qemu already does most of the hard work, and a code
generation backend is fairly simple. The diff for my current implementation
is 2k lines of common code, plus 1k lines for each of x86, amd64 and ppc32
hosts.
My
On Sunday 22 October 2006 2:27 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
I've been considering a machine config file for a while, but haven't come up
with a coherent way of representing everything yet.
Do you at least have a list of everything that needs to be represented? (I
have a list but am fairly certain
On Monday 23 October 2006 1:50 pm, K. Richard Pixley wrote:
Rob Landley wrote:
On Wednesday 18 October 2006 2:42 pm, Chuck Brazie wrote:
Is there any work going on now to add config file support?
Chuck Brazie
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
As a random end-user, I really like being
On Monday 23 October 2006 4:29 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
On Monday 23 October 2006 21:01, Rob Landley wrote:
On Sunday 22 October 2006 2:27 pm, Paul Brook wrote:
I've been considering a machine config file for a while, but haven't
come
up with a coherent way of representing everything yet
On Wednesday 18 October 2006 2:42 pm, Chuck Brazie wrote:
Is there any work going on now to add config file support?
Chuck Brazie
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
As a random end-user, I really like being able to run qemu without a config
file, configuring it entirely on the command line. I'd be highly
On Friday 20 October 2006 2:53 pm, K. Richard Pixley wrote:
Could someone please explain the issue with gcc4, please? Or point me
to an existing explanation?
I mean, I understand that qemu is believed to be building incorrectly
with gcc4. But what is the failure mode folks have been
On Monday 09 October 2006 8:08 am, Jim C. Brown wrote:
On Mon, Oct 09, 2006 at 12:05:02AM -0400, Rob Landley wrote:
qemu is primarily a dynamic translator not a virtualizer.
That's an implementation detail. The end result is running programs in a
virtual environment, and qemu's system
On Tuesday 10 October 2006 5:26 am, Joshua Root wrote:
Part of the generally accepted definition of virtualization is that the
majority of guest instructions execute directly on the real CPU with no
intervention by the VMM. QEMU + qvm86 does count as virtualization if
the system spends most of
On Tuesday 10 October 2006 11:46 am, Markus Schiltknecht wrote:
Hi,
I get this error, when I don't give qemu a 'hda':
Use /dev/zero. (Several people have suggested that qemu should default
to /dev/zero when you give it a kernel but don't give it a hard drive, but
last I checked it still
When I try to install kubuntu in a virtual x86-64 image, the emulator hangs at
seemingly random places, eating 100% cpu time but making no progress.
I've tried four different variants:
qemu 0.8.2 built with gcc-3.3
current cvs snapshot built with gcc-3.3
qemu 0.8.2 built with gcc-4.0
I'd like to install ubuntu for Power PC under qemu, which is one CD plus
network access so it seems pretty straightforward:
dd if=/dev/zero of=kubuntu-ppc.img bs=1M count=4096
qemu-system-ppc -hda kubuntu-ppc.img -cdrom kubuntu-5.10-install-powerpc.iso \
-boot d
But I can't get it to boot from
301 - 330 of 330 matches
Mail list logo
