Re: [Qemu-devel] MemoryRegionOps' {min,max}_access_size fields

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

On 27/03/2015 17:21, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I'm trying to understand what the idea behind these is. For one,
> without .valid.accepts set I can't see the two respective .valid
> fields take effect at all. Yet all examples I looked at don't set
> .valid.accepts. What's the deal here?

The examples you see of .valid.min_access_size/max_access_size could
indeed be removed.  Most of the time, whether an access is valid ==
whether the access is naturally aligned.

.valid.min_access_size/.valid.max_access_size is really the access size
expected by .valid.accepts.

> And then the way access_with_adjusted_size() works, it looks to
> me as if with .impl.min_access_size set to greater than 1
> unaligned accesses could still reach the actual read or write
> handler, as only the access size would get bumped, but no
> adjustment be made to the address.

I don't understand what you mean exactly.  Do you have an example?

Paolo