On 07/24/2013 06:39 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 24 July 2013 17:34, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> On 07/23/2013 11:15 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> On 23 July 2013 21:27, Richard Henderson wrote:
This is a refresh of a patch I wrote in 2010, and have re-posted every
6 months thereafter.
On 24 July 2013 17:34, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 07/23/2013 11:15 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 23 July 2013 21:27, Richard Henderson wrote:
>>> This is a refresh of a patch I wrote in 2010, and have re-posted every
>>> 6 months thereafter. To my knowledge, it has never been reviewed.
>>>
>
On 07/23/2013 11:15 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 23 July 2013 21:27, Richard Henderson wrote:
>> This is a refresh of a patch I wrote in 2010, and have re-posted every
>> 6 months thereafter. To my knowledge, it has never been reviewed.
>>
>> It supplies a replacement for the required x86-64 vds
On 23 July 2013 21:27, Richard Henderson wrote:
> This is a refresh of a patch I wrote in 2010, and have re-posted every
> 6 months thereafter. To my knowledge, it has never been reviewed.
>
> It supplies a replacement for the required x86-64 vdso. Anyone trying
> to emulate x86_64-linux on a ho
This is a refresh of a patch I wrote in 2010, and have re-posted every
6 months thereafter. To my knowledge, it has never been reviewed.
It supplies a replacement for the required x86-64 vdso. Anyone trying
to emulate x86_64-linux on a host other than same will quickly run into
the lack of a get
