On Fri 17 Feb 2017 01:30:09 PM CET, Pankaj Gupta wrote: > I think 'posix_madvise' was added for systems which didnot have > 'madvise' [...] For the systems which don't have madvise call > 'posix_madvise' is called which as per discussion is not right thing > for 'DONTNEED' option. It will not give desired results. > > Either we have to find right alternative or else it is already broken > for systems which don't support madvise.
Do you have an example of a call that is currently broken in the QEMU code? Berto
