On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 11:57:32 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
> I don't see any alternatives - if this approach is not liked, any suggestions?
The changes seems fine to me. It's just a pity that this would only work for
riscv for now.
I guess we don't have a better choice given current status of qemu-use
On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 10:45:54 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> Hi, for you to consider.
>>
>> These tests constantly fails in qemu-user.
>> Either the require host to be same arch explicit or implicit (sysroot).
>> E.g. "ptrace(PTRACE_ATTACH, ..) failed for 405157: Function not
>> implemented'" for SA
On Thu, 10 Apr 2025 02:13:46 GMT, Fei Yang wrote:
> > qemu-user, "uarch: qemu" in cpuinfo: `[0.084s][info ][os,cpu] CPU: total 28
> > (initial active 28) qemu rv64 rvi rvm rva rvf rvd rvc rvv zba zbb zbs zfh
> > zfhmin zvbc zvfh zicond` Hence we know this is qemu-user (only qemu-user
> > sets
On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 10:45:54 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> Hi, for you to consider.
>>
>> These tests constantly fails in qemu-user.
>> Either the require host to be same arch explicit or implicit (sysroot).
>> E.g. "ptrace(PTRACE_ATTACH, ..) failed for 405157: Function not
>> implemented'" for SA
On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 10:45:54 GMT, Robbin Ehn wrote:
>> Hi, for you to consider.
>>
>> These tests constantly fails in qemu-user.
>> Either the require host to be same arch explicit or implicit (sysroot).
>> E.g. "ptrace(PTRACE_ATTACH, ..) failed for 405157: Function not
>> implemented'" for SA
> Hi, for you to consider.
>
> These tests constantly fails in qemu-user.
> Either the require host to be same arch or they are very very slow in
> emulation.
> E.g. "ptrace(PTRACE_ATTACH, ..) failed for 405157: Function not implemented'"
> for SA tests.
> This is the initial set of tests, there
