Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/1] tci: eliminate UB due to unaligned reads

[Anatoly Trosinenko <anatoly.trosinenko@gmail.com>]

> So.  Why do you want to use TCI instead of a native TCG backend?

Frankly speaking, personally I just have a strange experiment on porting
QEMU to JavaScript. :) I used the TCI bytecode as some intermediate
patchable form for rarely executing BBs and for (re)generating asm.js from
it when required. I used a Python script to generate wrappers with exactly
10 arguments around helper functions. In fact, it may be worth for me to
create WebAssembly TCG backend and interpret **that** bytecode if required.

TCI may still be useful for someone else running QEMU on unsupported host,
though.

2018-03-03 17:13 GMT+03:00 Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>:

> On 03/03/2018 06:07 AM, Anatoly Trosinenko wrote:
> > Can rewriting TCI in such a way that every operation is aligned at 4- or
> even
> > 8-byte boundary fix the situation or are there some more serious
> problems?
>
> With the current TCI, there are also problems with calls to helper
> functions.
> The only portable way to do this is to use a library such as libffi.
>
> I once rewrote TCI completely in order to address both problems, but that
> only
> brought questions as to why TCI is useful at all.
>
> So.  Why do you want to use TCI instead of a native TCG backend?
>
>
> r~
>

--
Best regards,
Anatoly