From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=34470 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PhQ8L-0000m3-Vx
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 12:23:19 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefboombastic@gmail.com>) id 1PhQ8J-0000Jo-E9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 12:23:16 -0500
Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com ([74.125.82.53]:55521)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stefboombastic@gmail.com>) id 1PhQ8J-0000JO-5v
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 12:23:15 -0500
Received: by wwi18 with SMTP id 18so4219668wwi.10
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 24 Jan 2011 09:23:14 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4D3DB57C.3090306@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 18:23:08 +0100
From: Stefano Bonifazi <stefboombastic@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: TCG flow vs dyngen
References: <000001cbb58c$221f5a00$011aa8c0@side35ya3cah0n>
	<4D330D01.9060801@gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimyZTwkYQd5vir56u87=LrsD9e2oQfNF0sf0Z+2@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D33203B.6080505@gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=J9yhKsCWpNiS6A5r6SO4hF44TnYyyBqVYmmqi@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D3340AB.60001@gmail.com> <4D335A31.2090105@gmail.com>
	<8762tnbv15.fsf@ginnungagap.bsc.es> <4D3D7138.9000304@gmail.com>
	<87zkqqv2yi.fsf@ginnungagap.bsc.es> <4D3D860B.5050502@gmail.com>
	<87aaiqtk7r.fsf@ginnungagap.bsc.es>
In-Reply-To: <87aaiqtk7r.fsf@ginnungagap.bsc.es>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: xscript@gmx.net

Hi!

Thank you for answering me!

> If I understand this correctly, the execution of one of your PPC cores
> is oblivious of the others (they share no guest physical memory).
>
No! They do share the same address space.. the way I am loading the 
different qemu-ppc instances divides their namespaces allowing them to 
coexist, but they share the same address space anyway (that is the same 
of the caller process too), that is what I want for a communication.
The problem is that they are at the same time oblivious of the others 
and each of them wants to map its target binary at the same unique 
virtual address (again see my last post about relocating target code)..
I tried successfully the way of IPC (interprocess communication) having 
a different qemu-ppc spawned by systemc as a process, then using shared 
memory and signals for communicating.. pretty easy and well working, but 
the specs of my project (university) do not let me using IPC..

> [1] http://sites.google.com/site/hplabscotson/
Thank you, I am a student of digital electronics, with not big knowledge 
about developing in linux but this project is very interesting for my 
field.. some sort of alternative to systemc if I understand fine! Thanks 
surely I'll have a look at that!
Best regards!
Stefano B.