On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 03/24/2013 03:59 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> PC is FF600400 so either we've messed it up already or this
>> is just "64 bit address space doesn't fit in a 32 bit one".
>
> This is probably the fallback vdso address.
Yes, it lo
On 03/24/2013 03:59 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> PC is FF600400 so either we've messed it up already or this
> is just "64 bit address space doesn't fit in a 32 bit one".
This is probably the fallback vdso address.
I've previously sent patches to the list (several times) to add a real
vdso
24.03.2013 14:59, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 24 March 2013 10:43, Michael Tokarev wrote:
>> $ ./x86_64-linux-user/qemu-x86_64 bash64
>> qemu: uncaught target signal 11 (Segmentation fault) - core dumped
>> Segmentation Fault
>
> Are 64 bit linux-user guests on 32 bit hosts supposed to work?
> I wo
On 24 March 2013 10:43, Michael Tokarev wrote:
> $ ./x86_64-linux-user/qemu-x86_64 bash64
> qemu: uncaught target signal 11 (Segmentation fault) - core dumped
> Segmentation Fault
Are 64 bit linux-user guests on 32 bit hosts supposed to work?
I would expect them to be at best pretty unreliable.
$ ./x86_64-linux-user/qemu-x86_64 bash64
qemu: uncaught target signal 11 (Segmentation fault) - core dumped
Segmentation Fault
$ gdb x86_64-linux-user/qemu-x86_64
(gdb) ru bash64
Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
disas_insn (s=s@entry=0xcf98, pc_start=18446744073699066880)
