[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v4 0/9] memory: assert and define MemoryRegionOps callbacks
From: |
P J P |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH v4 0/9] memory: assert and define MemoryRegionOps callbacks |
Date: |
Thu, 27 Aug 2020 17:38:22 +0530 (IST) |
+-- On Mon, 17 Aug 2020, P J P wrote --+
| +-- On Mon, 17 Aug 2020, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote --+
| | On 8/17/20 7:02 AM, P J P wrote:
| | > +-- On Sun, 16 Aug 2020, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote --+
| | > | What about read_with_attrs()/write_with_attrs()? It seems they are part
| | > | of the same problem.
| | >
| | > * read/write_with_attrs function is called if read/write callback is not
| | > defined
| | >
| | > ../softmmu/memory.c
| | > if (mr->ops->write) {
| | > ... memory_region_write_accessor, mr,
| | > } else {
| | > ... memory_region_write_with_attrs_accessor,
| | >
| | > So, defining read/write methods may also address read/write_with_attrs
| | > issue?
| | >
| | > * $ grep -Eri -A 5 -B 5 '(\.read_with_attrs|\.write_with_attrs)' . |
fpaste
| | >
| | > -> https://paste.centos.org/view/386c9597
| | >
| | > It doesn't show an occurrence where one of the read/write_with_attrs is
| | > missing.
| | >
| | > * Nevertheless, if we need to define read/write_with_attrs routines,
because
| | > memory_region_init_io() would assert(3) for them
| | >
| | > could that be a subsequent patch series please?
| |
| | Yes no problem, I was just wondering and wasn't sure.
|
| @Peter, @Paolo: (To confirm)
| Do we ping/reach out to respective maintainers for merging this series?
Ping...!
--
Prasad J Pandit / Red Hat Product Security Team
8685 545E B54C 486B C6EB 271E E285 8B5A F050 DE8D
- Re: [PATCH v4 7/9] tz-ppc: add dummy read/write methods, (continued)