[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFEAcA-9-CfWn9YG+QnNS0p+SfT73RgaJdqxnXmuYcQ4rWAQ3A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 09:36:23 +0100
From: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@...aro.org>
To: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
Cc: QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>, musl@...ts.openwall.com,
microblaze-linux@...ts.itee.uq.edu.au,
Stefan Kristiansson <stefan.kristiansson@...nalahti.fi>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Bogus struct stat64 for qemu-microblaze (user emulation)?
On 16 July 2014 05:02, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
> The qemu-microblaze definition of struct stat64 seems to mismatch the
> kernel definition, which is using asm-generic/stat.h. See:
>
> http://git.qemu.org/?p=qemu.git;a=blob;f=linux-user/syscall_defs.h;h=c9e6323905486452f518102bf40ba73143c9d601;hb=HEAD#l1469
> http://git.qemu.org/?p=qemu.git;a=blob;f=linux-user/syscall.c;h=a50229d0d72fc68966515fcf2bc308b833a3c032;hb=HEAD#l4949
>
> This seems to be causing a truncated-to-32-bit inode number to be
> stored in the location where st_ino should reside, and a spurious copy
> of the inode number to be written in a unused slot at the end of the
> structure.
Sounds quite plausible -- we've had issues with other archs
not having correct stat struct definitions in QEMU. I don't
suppose anybody's done much testing of the microblaze
linux-user code.
> Is my analysis correct? Stefan Kristiansson and I found this while
> working on the or1k port of musl libc, where it seems our structure
> for the existing microblaze port is wrongly aligned with the qemu
> definition rather than the definition the real kernel is using. Before
> I try correcting this on our side, I want to make sure we're working
> with the right version.
I would definitely trust the kernel definition, not QEMU's!
thanks
-- PMM
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
