From: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH]ish NPTL support.
Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2006 18:07:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200612131807.53555.paul@codesourcery.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1166032256.5253.766.camel@pmac.infradead.org>
> - sys_set_tid_address():
> - clone(CLONE_CHILD_CLEARTID):
>
> We _could_ manage to do this in qemu for controlled thread exit -- it
> would be hard for uncontrolled exit though. But I don't see any harm in
> just letting the kernel do it either. I don't mind too much, but if we
> can let the kernel do it I'm happier that way.
The harm occurs if the host libc had per-thread state (eg. it has thread local
variables). If we bypass the host thread library then libc doesn't have
chance to initialize it's per-thread structures for that new thread, and bad
things are liable to happen then that thread uses libc functions.
> We need endianness-mangling on these so we have to get involved somehow.
> But I think we do need to use the kernel's support and then marshal the
> result back to the guest's memory.
Once you start proxying things to convert endianness I'd expect it to be
easier to just emulate everything.
Even when you implement all the syscalls qemu still won't work reliably. In
particular loads and stores will not be atomic. On real hardware a word
aligned load or store is guaranteed to complete atomically. qemu sometimes
splits these into multiple byte accesses, so the guest could see a partial
access. There are also memory ordering issues (x86 has comparatively strong
memory ordering guarantees, other hosts require a memory barrier to enforce
proper ordering). I've seen both these cause failures in in real
applications.
Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-12-13 18:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-12-09 22:38 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH]ish NPTL support David Woodhouse
2006-12-13 16:02 ` Mulyadi Santosa
2006-12-13 17:01 ` David Woodhouse
2006-12-13 17:22 ` Paul Brook
2006-12-13 17:32 ` David Woodhouse
2006-12-13 17:42 ` Paul Brook
2006-12-13 17:50 ` David Woodhouse
2006-12-13 18:07 ` Paul Brook [this message]
2006-12-13 18:44 ` Fabrice Bellard
2006-12-14 2:16 ` Jamie Lokier
2006-12-16 13:26 ` David Woodhouse
2006-12-16 15:17 ` Paul Brook
2006-12-16 18:48 ` Jamie Lokier
2006-12-13 17:35 ` Thiemo Seufer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200612131807.53555.paul@codesourcery.com \
--to=paul@codesourcery.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).