From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LBXdq-0004rr-PH
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 13 Dec 2008 11:46:58 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LBXdo-0004q0-7o
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 13 Dec 2008 11:46:57 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=43910 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LBXdn-0004pW-Gd
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 13 Dec 2008 11:46:55 -0500
Received: from rn-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.170.190]:29577)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1LBXdn-00058R-4W
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sat, 13 Dec 2008 11:46:55 -0500
Received: by rn-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id 56so1715716rnw.8
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sat, 13 Dec 2008 08:46:54 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4943E6F9.1050001@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2008 10:46:49 -0600
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <cc5d812eb9369a7ad2ef.1229105804@duo.random>
	<4942B841.6010900@codemonkey.ws>
	<20081213143944.GD30537@random.random>
In-Reply-To: <20081213143944.GD30537@random.random>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 2 of 5] add can_dma/post_dma for direct IO
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
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: Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>
Cc: chrisw@redhat.com, avi@redhat.com, Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 01:15:13PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>   
>> void *cpu_physical_memory_map(target_phys_addr_t addr, ram_addr_t size, int 
>> is_write);
>>     
>
> Just a side note (doesn't mean I agree with the above), it doesn't
> make sense to use an ram_addr_t size when you return a 32bit address
> on 32bit qemu build.
>   

size_t is completely wrong for 64-bit targets on 32-bit hosts.  
ram_addr_t is the type we use for guest ram size.  It's 64-bit all of 
the time simply because it's easier to do that and we decided that the 
little bit of wasted space/computations were not a problem.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori