qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
To: QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Cc: Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@iki.fi>, Laurent Vivier <Laurent@vivier.eu>
Subject: [Qemu-devel] linux-user: drop support for "unknown" host CPUs (ie hppa and m68k) ?
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 10:26:27 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFEAcA8Bkh4-jjDKNjOxgNQhm+-tGSLE4Opz2wEptkMuGQKaqQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)

Currently our configure script allows linux-user targets to be built
for "unknown" host CPU architectures (which must be using the TCI
interpreter). However, code like user-exec.c has host-architecture
#ifdef ladders which in practice mean you can't build linux-user for
an arbitrary host architecture. The only two host architectures which
have code in user-exec.c but aren't recognised by configure are
HPPA and m68k.

I'd like to move to an "every supported host architecture has a
linux-user/host/$(ARCH)/hostdep.h header" model (this fixes a problem
in the code currently in master where make doesn't notice it needs to
rebuild if a host arch moves from "using generic/" to "using $(ARCH)").
Host architectures which we sort-of-but-don't support are an annoying
corner case I'd like to be able to drop entirely, by either:
 (1) just dropping the support outright
 (2) promoting them to at least being recognised by configure as
   a known architecture, even if one without a tcg backend

Does this seem like a good idea?

I think HPPA should definitely be in category (1) -- we dropped
the TCG backend years back, and I don't think any of us has a
machine to test changes on,.

Which category should m68k host support go into? Does anybody
actually use m68k host + TCI interpreter linux-user ? My guess
is this isn't actually used, because the m68k-specific code in
user-exec.c doesn't set the "is_write" flag correctly, which means
that guests which do self-modifying code won't work (including
anything using a signal handler with an on-stack trampoline).
So my preference would be to drop the m68k-host code too.

thanks
-- PMM

             reply	other threads:[~2016-06-13  9:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-06-13  9:26 Peter Maydell [this message]
2016-06-13  9:40 ` [Qemu-devel] linux-user: drop support for "unknown" host CPUs (ie hppa and m68k) ? Laurent Vivier
2016-06-13 22:06 ` Richard Henderson

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=CAFEAcA8Bkh4-jjDKNjOxgNQhm+-tGSLE4Opz2wEptkMuGQKaqQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
    --cc=Laurent@vivier.eu \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=riku.voipio@iki.fi \
    /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).