From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I4Je1-0001ls-Me for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 Jun 2007 12:48:29 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1I4Jdz-0001kV-8t for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 Jun 2007 12:48:28 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1I4Jdz-0001kQ-1k for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 Jun 2007 12:48:27 -0400 Received: from ik-out-1112.google.com ([66.249.90.182]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1I4Jdy-0006nJ-Ga for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 29 Jun 2007 12:48:26 -0400 Received: by ik-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id c29so1219823ika for ; Fri, 29 Jun 2007 09:48:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 19:48:24 +0300 From: "Blue Swirl" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] 4G address space remapping on 64-bit host In-Reply-To: <4684DBBD.2090907@bellard.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <4684DBBD.2090907@bellard.org> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 6/29/07, Fabrice Bellard wrote: > In fact, running in 64 bit is not necessary : It is simpler and more > efficient to use kqemu (or KVM) to handle the address space remapping. > The trick is to run the translator in the upper part or lower part of > the 32 bit address space and to protect it with segments. Would that be hard to implement for the kqemu case? What is your guesstimate on what kind of performance benefit would Sparc32 emulation get from that?