Am 25.02.2014 09:39, schrieb Alex Bennée:
Dann Frazier dann.fraz...@canonical.com writes:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Alex Bennée alex.ben...@linaro.org 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
Dann Frazier dann.fraz...@canonical.com writes:
On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 6:40 AM, Alex Bennée alex.ben...@linaro.org 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
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 generic patches
Janne Grunau j...@jannau.net writes:
Hi,
On 2014-02-17 13:40:00 +, Alex Bennée wrote:
snip
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
Hi,
On Tue, 25 Feb 2014, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 25 February 2014 13:33, Michael Matz m...@suse.de 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
On 2014-02-25 15:54:37 +, Alex Bennée wrote:
Feedback I'm interested in
==
* Any instruction failure (please include the log line with the
unsupported message)
Neon support is not complete enough to run the hand written neon
assembler optimizations in
