From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:53114) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UY76C-0006Tj-6N for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 May 2013 23:55:57 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UY76B-0008IU-0h for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 May 2013 23:55:56 -0400 Received: from mail-gh0-f169.google.com ([209.85.160.169]:53510) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UY76A-0008ID-Py for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 02 May 2013 23:55:54 -0400 Received: by mail-gh0-f169.google.com with SMTP id r1so216827ghr.14 for ; Thu, 02 May 2013 20:55:52 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 01 May 2013 12:12:05 -0500 From: Rob Landley In-Reply-To: (from atar4qemu@gmail.com on Tue Apr 30 16:31:29 2013) Message-Id: <1367428325.18069.203@driftwood> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; DelSp=Yes; Format=Flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Target-agnostic virtio? List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Artyom Tarasenko Cc: qemu-devel On 04/30/2013 04:31:29 PM, Artyom Tarasenko wrote: > On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 7:43 AM, Rob Landley wrote: > > On 04/27/2013 03:00:06 PM, Artyom Tarasenko wrote: > >> > >> > For a lot of the 64-bit targets, actual 64 bit userspace support =20 > is > >> > strangely lacking. For ppc64 they say to use ppc32, and I've =20 > been told > >> > that > >> > about sparc64 as well. I don't know if this is an optimization =20 > or a > >> > requirement. I have a 32 bit image, I'd like to test the 64 bit > >> > codepaths as > >> > well... > >> > >> I guess it's rather an optimisation. At least I saw BusyBox =20 > working under > >> QEMU before the sparc v8plus was fixed. > > > > > > If you mean http://busybox.net/downloads/binaries/busybox-sparc =20 > that's a > > 32-bit binary output from the Aboriginal Linux build. >=20 > No, I mean busybox-static_1.18.4-2_sparc64.deb from the older Debian > distribution. > Meanwhile it's 1.20, > http://ftp.debian-ports.org/debian/pool-sparc64/main/b/busybox/busybox-st= atic_1.20.0-8_sparc64.deb > but I only experimented with 1.18. Back then it was definitely a pure > 64 bit application: let's see, wget the 1.20 version, dpkg-deb -X busybox-static* sparky, strings sparky/bin/busybox | grep -i libc... Statically linked against glibc 2.13. Still, good test for at least the =20 application emulation side of things. I hit the limits of platform support I could beat out of uClibc a few =20 years back, and these days I'm poking at musl. (It doesn't support much =20 yet, but it's a _lot_ easier to add new targets and klibc provides =20 bsd-licensed templates for most of them.) I need to reproduce the =20 existing uClibc targets I'm using so I can wean my project off of that =20 package before worrying too much about new stuff though. :) Thanks, Rob=