[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API
From: |
Peter Maydell |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API |
Date: |
Wed, 18 May 2011 16:17:32 +0100 |
On 18 May 2011 16:11, Jan Kiszka <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 2011-05-18 16:36, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> There is nothing we can do with a return code. You can't fail an mmio
>> that causes overlapping physical memory map.
>
> We must fail such requests to make progress with the API. That may
> happen either on caller side or in cpu_register_memory_region itself
> (hwerror). Otherwise the new API will just be a shiny new facade for on
> old and still fragile building.
If we don't allow overlapping regions, then how do you implement
things like "on startup board maps ROM into lower addresses
over top of devices, but later it is unmapped and you can see
the underlying devices" ? (You can't currently do this AFAIK,
and it would be nice if the new API supported it.)
-- PMM
- [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API, Avi Kivity, 2011/05/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API, Jan Kiszka, 2011/05/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API, Avi Kivity, 2011/05/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API, Jan Kiszka, 2011/05/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API,
Peter Maydell <=
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API, Jan Kiszka, 2011/05/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API, Anthony Liguori, 2011/05/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API, Jan Kiszka, 2011/05/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API, Anthony Liguori, 2011/05/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API, Alex Williamson, 2011/05/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API, Jan Kiszka, 2011/05/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API, Alex Williamson, 2011/05/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API, Jan Kiszka, 2011/05/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API, Anthony Liguori, 2011/05/18
- Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Memory API, Gleb Natapov, 2011/05/19