On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 7:48 PM Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 09:29:58AM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: > > > > On the contrary, that would be a much better interface for QEMU. > > We always know when we're doing an open-syscall on behalf > > of the guest, and it would be trivial to make the fcntl() call then. > > That would ensure that we don't accidentally get the > > '32-bit semantics' on file descriptors QEMU opens for its own > > purposes, and wouldn't leave us open to the risk in future that > > setting the PER_LINUX32 flag for all of QEMU causes > > unexpected extra behaviour in future kernels that would be correct > > for the guest binary but wrong/broken for QEMU's own internals. > > If using a flag set by fcntl is better for qemu, then by all means > let's go with that instead of using a personality flag/number. > > Linus, do you have what you need to do a respin of the patch? Absolutely, I'm a bit occupied this week but I will try to get to it early next week! Thanks a lot for the directions here, it's highly valuable. Yours, Linus Walleij
