Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 15/30] memory: add address_space_valid

[Jan Kiszka]

On 2013-05-24 08:13, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2013-05-23 20:04, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> On 21 May 2013 11:57, Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> +bool address_space_valid(AddressSpace *as, hwaddr addr, int len, bool 
>>> is_write)
>>> +{
>>> +    AddressSpaceDispatch *d = as->dispatch;
>>> +    MemoryRegionSection *section;
>>> +    int l;
>>> +    hwaddr page;
>>> +
>>> +    while (len > 0) {
>>> +        page = addr & TARGET_PAGE_MASK;
>>> +        l = (page + TARGET_PAGE_SIZE) - addr;
>>> +        if (l > len) {
>>> +            l = len;
>>> +        }
>>> +        section = phys_page_find(d, addr >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS);
>>> +        if (section->mr == &io_mem_unassigned ||
>>> +            (is_write && section->mr->readonly)) {
>>
>> It's kind of bogus that io_mem_unassigned is the only MemoryRegion
>> that can be unreadable. Why is 'readonly' a MemoryRegion attribute
>> and 'writeonly' not? Shouldn't we be calling the MemoryRegionOps
>> accepts() callback here? What about access alignment constraints
>> and access size restrictions? What if the validity of the range
>> changes between the time you asked and when you actually do the
>> access?
>>
>> The whole API is kind of unconvincing really, especially since
>> the only thing we seem to use it for is some parameter checking
>> in spapr_llan.c (via a huge pile of intermediate wrappers).
> 
> I'll also have a use for it: replace isa_is_ioport_assigned.

But for this use case, something like
memory_region_access_valid(MemoryRegion *, ...) would be more helpful
because pci_address_space_io returns a memory region, not an address
space. Can we change it? dma_memory_valid could simply pass the address
space's root region.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SDP-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux