On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 11:17:09PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 9:01 PM David Laight wrote:
> >
> > From: sonicadvan...@gmail.com
> > > Sent: 15 January 2021 07:03
> > > Problem presented:
> > > A backwards compatibility layer that allows running x86-64 and x86
> > > proce
...
> He's already doing the system call emulation for all the system
> calls other than ioctl in user space though. In my experience,
> there are actually fairly few ioctl commands that are different
> between architectures -- most of them have no misaligned
> or architecture-defined struct member
On Fri, Jan 15, 2021 at 9:01 PM David Laight wrote:
>
> From: sonicadvan...@gmail.com
> > Sent: 15 January 2021 07:03
> > Problem presented:
> > A backwards compatibility layer that allows running x86-64 and x86
> > processes inside of an AArch64 process.
> > - CPU is emulated
> > - Syscall in
From: sonicadvan...@gmail.com
> Sent: 15 January 2021 07:03
> Problem presented:
> A backwards compatibility layer that allows running x86-64 and x86
> processes inside of an AArch64 process.
> - CPU is emulated
> - Syscall interface is mostly passthrough
> - Some syscalls require patching or
