Hi Henry; thanks for these patches. Please could you provide
> a Signed-off-by: line for them? This says you're happy for us
> to apply them to QEMU under our license, and we can't do anything
> with them without one. The top part of
> https://wiki.qemu.org/Contribute/SubmitAPatch
> has more detail.
>
Yup, I'll resubmit both in proper format.
> You'll probably have better luck if you submit patches as separate
> emails rather than all in one -- the set of people who care about
>
Can do.
In general, 64-bit binary on a 32-bit host is not supported by linux-user.
> Various things are likely to go wrong for anything but the simplest
> of guest binaries. You need a 64-bit host to reliably use linux-user
> for a 64-bit guest binary.
>
I didn't test it very hard, I was only using it to run the couple
Android SDK binaries (aapt and friends) that Android Studio runs; these in
general open a file or two, process them, write out a result, so they
probably are pretty simple guest binaries. Nevertheless,with this patch
these few x86-64 binaries run on 32-bit ARM and (last I checked) 32-bit
Intel.
>
> I think your change isn't sufficient to handle the "target 32 bits
> and host 64 bits" case, because the 64-on-32 code path that you're
> using for it uses the guest's buffer size as the size of the
> host buffer it allocates to pass to the host syscall.
>
....
> Maybe I'm missing a clever trick?
>
As far as I can tell, it makes a "linux_dirent" and "target_dirent"
and is pretty careful to calculate rather than assume offsets, and so on as
it copies data from one struct to the other. i didn't look before, but
there is in fact a line "assert(count1 + treclen <= count);" that would
trigger if the buffer is going to be overflowed. I think the code may not
have even been needed, except that d_type (file type) was moved to the
"middle" of the dirent64 struct instead of at the end.
Thanks!
-- Henry
