From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MQSvV-0007zl-6H
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 17:19:09 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MQSvQ-0007zY-Jd
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 17:19:08 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35270 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MQSvQ-0007zV-Gf
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 17:19:04 -0400
Received: from mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.48]:49165)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <sdbrady@ntlworld.com>) id 1MQSvP-0005z1-Sy
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 17:19:04 -0400
Received: from aamtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.35])
	by mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com
	(InterMail vM.7.08.04.00 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id
	<20090713211902.LPKO6611.mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@aamtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com>
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:19:02 +0100
Received: from miranda.arrow ([213.107.24.213])
	by aamtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com
	(InterMail vG.2.02.00.01 201-2161-120-102-20060912) with ESMTP id
	<20090713211902.URGA13254.aamtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@miranda.arrow>
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:19:02 +0100
Received: from sdb by miranda.arrow with local (Exim 4.63)
	(envelope-from <sdbrady@ntlworld.com>) id 1MQSvR-0002lG-FR
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:19:05 +0100
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 22:19:05 +0100
From: Stuart Brady <sdbrady@ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 6/6] use uint32_t for ioport port and value
	instead of int.
Message-ID: <20090713211905.GA10557@miranda.arrow>
References: <1246530731-14597-1-git-send-email-yamahata@valinux.co.jp>
	<1246530731-14597-7-git-send-email-yamahata@valinux.co.jp>
	<4A564003.5080707@codemonkey.ws>
	<20090710082121.GB5471@const.bordeaux.inria.fr>
	<20090710084508.GM12665%yamahata@valinux.co.jp>
	<4A573A50.1040200@codemonkey.ws>
	<20090713031406.GS12665%yamahata@valinux.co.jp>
	<4A5B8413.5080201@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4A5B8413.5080201@codemonkey.ws>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 01:59:31PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> If so, I would think that we should use ram_addr_t for addr and then we 
> can use the appropriate uintN_t type for value.  Switching value like 
> that though could have some subtle consequences.  For instance, 
> cpu_outb(env, ..., 128) would have worked properly before as would 
> cpu_outb(env, ..., -32).

Isn't ram_addr_t solely for return values from (and internals of)
qemu_ram_alloc() and friends?

Perhaps port IO addresses should have their own type?

TBH, I'm not so sure that port IO is particularly 'special' in any way.
I suppose that generally speaking, code can't be executed from port IO
addresses (although that's not true on machines where 'port IO' is
actually memory mapped).  I'm not sure how PCI fits into this, though.

Cheers,
-- 
Stuart Brady