@@ -1964,7 +1964,9 @@ sched_getcpu = 0
19641964
19651965so we see that the affinity was restricted to the second core from the start.
19661966
1967- Let's do a QEMU observation to justify this example being in the repository with <<gdb-step-debug-userland-non-init,userland breakpoints>>:
1967+ Let's do a QEMU observation to justify this example being in the repository with <<gdb-step-debug-userland-non-init,userland breakpoints>>.
1968+
1969+ We will run our `/sched_getaffinity.out` infinitely many time, on core 0 and core 1 alternatively:
19681970
19691971....
19701972./run -c2 -d -F 'i=0; while true; do taskset -c $i,$i /sched_getaffinity.out; i=$((! $i)); done'
@@ -1991,7 +1993,7 @@ Then, inside GDB:
19911993(gdb) c
19921994....
19931995
1994- So we observe that `info threads` shows the actual correct core on which the process was restricted to run by `taskset`!
1996+ and we observe that `info threads` shows the actual correct core on which the process was restricted to run by `taskset`!
19951997
19961998We should also try it out with kernel modules: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/28347876/set-cpu-affinity-on-a-loadable-linux-kernel-module
19971999
@@ -2316,6 +2318,25 @@ Bibliography:
23162318* https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7415515/how-to-access-the-control-registers-cr0-cr2-cr3-from-a-program-getting-segmenta/7419306#7419306
23172319* https://stackoverflow.com/questions/18717016/what-are-ring-0-and-ring-3-in-the-context-of-operating-systems/44483439#44483439
23182320
2321+ === arm
2322+
2323+ ==== Run arm executable in aarch64
2324+
2325+ TODO Can you run arm executables in the aarch64 guest? https://stackoverflow.com/questions/22460589/armv8-running-legacy-32-bit-applications-on-64-bit-os/51466709#51466709
2326+
2327+ I've tried:
2328+
2329+ ....
2330+ ./out/aarch64/buildroot/host/bin/aarch64-linux-gcc -static ~/test/hello_world.c -o data/9p/a.out
2331+ ./run -aA -F '/mnt/9p/a.out'
2332+ ....
2333+
2334+ but it fails with:
2335+
2336+ ....
2337+ a.out: line 1: syntax error: unexpected word (expecting ")")
2338+ ....
2339+
23192340=== mips64
23202341
23212342Keep in mind that MIPS has the worst support compared to our other architectures due to the smaller community. Patches welcome as usual.
0 commit comments