From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M4uPP-00055G-Ug for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 May 2009 06:12:55 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1M4uPN-00054c-2v for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 May 2009 06:12:54 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=34580 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1M4uPM-00054X-MY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 May 2009 06:12:52 -0400 Received: from dd21438.kasserver.com ([85.13.141.110]:35686) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M4uPM-0001BQ-Dr for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 15 May 2009 06:12:52 -0400 Message-ID: <4A0D4022.40107@opensuse.org> Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 12:12:50 +0200 From: Martin Mohring MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Revived GUEST_BASE support for usermode emulation targets [v4] References: <1241028203-19687-1-git-send-email-riku.voipio@iki.fi> <20090505204636.GB32298@kos.to> <200905150325.31918.paul@codesourcery.com> <20090515095728.GA24314@kos.to> In-Reply-To: <20090515095728.GA24314@kos.to> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Riku Voipio Cc: martin.mohring@opensuse.org, mika.westerberg@iki.fi, Paul Brook , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Riku Voipio wrote: > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 03:25:31AM +0100, Paul Brook wrote: > >> On Tuesday 05 May 2009, Riku Voipio wrote: >> >>> On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 10:02:41PM +0400, malc wrote: >>> >>>> Things should work the way they are in your latest patch on x86 and >>>> should be done the way it's done in the original submission (mov + add) >>>> for x86_64. >>>> > > >>> Ok.. here we go. not on a amd64 machine right now so I will test >>> that part tomorrow. >>> > > >> I'm pretty sure it's still broken for large offsets. >> > > It is indeed broken. Since tcg_out_addi maps on x86_64 to tgen_arithi64 which > doesn't accept 64bit values. But as Martin said, the currrent use for this > patch is just to add very minimal offsets. > > Martin, I just rebased the linux-user patches, they should apply again > (there was only a conflict in configure): > Sorted this out already by myself, tnx though. Since i am using guest base, what does its brokenness mean? Riku, will you talk with the author to fix it according to Pauls suggestions? Or will the patch be accepted under the assumptions/constraints it was written. Or is the request that a generic solution fixes other longstanding issues? Martin