From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L1Mpk-0007Rt-Oc for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 10:13:12 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1L1Mpi-0007RH-Pk for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 10:13:12 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=44801 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1L1Mpi-0007RD-LH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 10:13:10 -0500 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:56591 helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1L1Mpi-0004Hd-9n for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 10:13:10 -0500 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1L1Mpd-0005Ow-W3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:13:06 +0000 Received: from p54b3d1d0.dip.t-dialin.net ([84.179.209.208]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:13:05 +0000 Received: from usenet by p54b3d1d0.dip.t-dialin.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:13:05 +0000 From: Steffen Liebergeld Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:12:58 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <200811141415.51702.paul@codesourcery.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: news Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: Status on ARM host cpu 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 Hi Paul, Paul Brook schrieb: > On Friday 14 November 2008, Steffen Liebergeld wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I am currently researching of whether or not it is feasible to port kqemu >> to the ARM platform. The website says qemu on ARM hosts is in >> "testing"-state. Does that still apply to the latest svn-Version? > > Should just about work, though you should expect bugs. > However I advise using KVM and not kqemu. KVM has already been merged to > upstream kernels, and the chances of getting another hypervisor interface > merged are approximately zero. KVM is not an option for me (and is not available for the ARM-platform). I plan to port kqemu for the ARM-platform. Do have any estimates, for how much work would be needed to adopt the kqemu-Interface of qemu (which is x86-centric) to ARM (ignoring the effort needed to port the kqemu-kernel-module)? Many thanks, Steffen