From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MLIt5-0006ko-Bz
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:35:19 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MLIt0-0006jP-P5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:35:18 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=60083 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MLIsy-0006jL-Ux
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:35:13 -0400
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:56444)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1MLIsy-0008RO-7m
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:35:12 -0400
Message-ID: <4A48DF8B.7050606@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 18:36:43 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Implement PC port80 debug register.
References: <1246262725-23825-1-git-send-email-jljusten@gmail.com>	
	<4A48C5F5.6030402@codemonkey.ws> <4A48CE67.9070705@redhat.com>
	<2a50f7880906290826t4128b11dyc68a36fd01e8208c@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <2a50f7880906290826t4128b11dyc68a36fd01e8208c@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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: Jordan Justen <jljusten@gmail.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 06/29/2009 06:26 PM, Jordan Justen wrote:
> Avi,
>
> Well, I am not sure if this it globally the case for PC motherboards, 
> but in my experience, it has been read/write.

It's just some random memory that might not actually be grounded in reality.

>
> At least for a system such as qemu, it make it difficult to use the 
> port80 checkpoint of software without being able to read the last 
> value written.

Why would software ever need to read it?  You want a monitor command so 
the user can read it.  I don't recall ever seeing a read of port 80 (I 
don't have any objections to that though).

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function