Janne Grunau writes:
> Hi,
>
> On 2014-02-17 13:40:00 +, Alex Bennée wrote:
>>
>
>> In my tree the remaining insns that the GCC aarch64 tests need to
>> implement are:
>> FRECPE
>> FRECPX
>> CLS (2 misc variant)
>> CLZ (2 misc variant)
>> FSQRT
My GitHub tree now has f
Hi,
On Tue, 25 Feb 2014, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 25 February 2014 13:33, Michael Matz wrote
> > The biggest road-block is that signal vs syscall handling is
> > fundamentally broken in linux-user and it's unfixable without
> > assembler implementations of the syscall caller.
>
> I'm not entir
On 25 February 2014 13:33, Michael Matz wrote
> The biggest road-block is that signal vs syscall handling is
> fundamentally broken in linux-user and it's unfixable without
> assembler implementations of the syscall caller.
I'm not entirely sure it's possible to fix even with
hand-rolled assembly
Hi,
On Tue, 25 Feb 2014, Andreas Färber wrote:
> >> There are some pretty large differences between these trees with
> >> respect to signal syscalls - is that the likely culprit?
> >
> > Quite likely. We explicitly concentrated on the arch64 specific
> > instruction emulation leaving more gene
Am 25.02.2014 09:39, schrieb Alex Bennée:
>
> Dann Frazier writes:
>
>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Alex Bennée wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>
>> Thanks to all involved for your work here!
>>
>>> After a solid few months of work the QEMU master branch [1] has now reached
>>> instruction feature parity
Dann Frazier writes:
> On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Alex Bennée wrote:
>> Hi,
>
> Thanks to all involved for your work here!
>
>> After a solid few months of work the QEMU master branch [1] has now reached
>> instruction feature parity with the suse-1.6 [6] tree that a lot of people
>> have
