From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HeSKI-0005Lf-3R for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Apr 2007 04:49:14 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HeSKF-0005Kn-Sw for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Apr 2007 04:49:13 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HeSKF-0005Kf-7r for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Apr 2007 04:49:11 -0400 Received: from honiara.magic.fr ([195.154.193.36]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HeSFI-0002wh-M9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 19 Apr 2007 04:44:05 -0400 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu/hw pckbd.c From: "J. Mayer" In-Reply-To: <200704181708.22450.paul@codesourcery.com> References: <1176906055.16811.24.camel@jma4.dev.netgem.com> <200704181708.22450.paul@codesourcery.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 10:43:32 +0200 Message-Id: <1176972212.6333.101.camel@rapid> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Cc: Blue Swirl , Paul Brook On Wed, 2007-04-18 at 17:08 +0100, Paul Brook wrote: > > > If you're interressed in such a feature, you may take a look of what > > > I've done in hw/ppc405_uc.c. There are some device sharing the same > > > memory page on those microcontrollers so I introduced a fake device > > > called mmio that allow to register multiple devices into a single page > > > in Qemu. I do use the serial_mm_init with the ioregister parameter set > > > to 0 for those designs. > > > This code may not be as generic as it would be if we want to make it a > > > standard Qemu function, but this may give a basis or ideas for it. > > > > On Sparc32 there are several devices that would benefit from sub-page > > granularity, so I vote for making this generic. > > While you're fixing this, it would be good to fix overlapping devices as > well ;-) Currently if you (temporarily) have overlapping regions then remove > one of them you end up with unmapped memory. What is the correct behavior in such a case ? What device would you actually see ? May be it different to one architecture to another ? I think there are busses and/or architectures where this is not possible, you would only get a fault on the bus in such a case. So it seems to me not to be easy to find a generic and appropriate way to fix this behavior, don't you think ? -- J. Mayer Never organized