On 1/30/23 13:14, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 30/1/23 20:19, Richard Henderson wrote:
But I do question whether we need to support 64-bit guests on 32-bit hosts at
all.
Retaining 32-bit on 32-bit allows arm32 to emulate i686, which I suspect, but have no
proof, is the limit of what users actually want.
I presume you implicitly restrict that to user emulation, right?
No, there's no specific reason to eliminate e.g. qemu-system-i386. or any other 32-bit
guest. Though quite often such hardware doesn't really have enough ram to do a good job,
that's not a technical argument against.
WRT i686, if your example is "i686 useremu on non-x86 embedde router"
then any 32-bit host is potentially interested, not only arm32.
arm32 was merely an example -- the other 32-bit hosts are i686, mips, ppc. But we don't
have many of them.
I remember being able to run armhf binaries on armel hosts (and vice
versa) was useful 7 years ago.
Fair enough.
Today I have no clue, we could poll the community and some
distributions.
Sure.
r~
