From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=43795 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PAnet-0004Pr-Mr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 13:50:06 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1PAnQr-00042h-KF
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 13:35:34 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:28558)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1PAnQr-00042V-5w
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 26 Oct 2010 13:35:33 -0400
Message-ID: <4CC7115D.4050108@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 19:35:25 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Type-safe ioport callbacks
References: <1287934469-16624-1-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com>
	<1287934469-16624-2-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com>
	<AANLkTikh=Axbo9PEf5OuFpVq-_PnYxLTXL2PozqZ5fxf@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CC55554.4060103@redhat.com>
	<AANLkTik8jVgiM665BvsdJesVLE4A2Vo7V+y82APC=diw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CC68BE1.5010207@redhat.com>
	<AANLkTinh6kiv65K4G0N73b4Eivf4vXz7dE5E4Y_NJYTn@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CC70D5D.4020109@redhat.com> <4CC70F65.7050506@codemonkey.ws>
In-Reply-To: <4CC70F65.7050506@codemonkey.ws>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; 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.nongnu.org/archive/html/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: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org

  On 10/26/2010 07:27 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>> Sorry, I don't follow your meaning.
>>
>> When I said "size is implied" I meant that the IOPort object has a 
>> separate function pointer for sizes 1, 2, and 4, so it 
>> ioport_register() doesn't need a size parameter.  But I don't see how 
>> that relates to your comment.
>
>
> Yeah, I don't think it makes sense to combine "this is how to dispatch 
> I/O" with "this is a region of I/O address space".

Oh, so Blue meant the size of the region in ports, not the size of the 
individual ports.  I think that putting the range length (but not base 
address) in the IOPort structure may make sense.

>
> I think an IORegion should contain an IOPort structure though.  I 
> think the name needs rethinking.
>
> Maybe:
>
> struct PortIOHandler;
> struct MemoryIOHandler;

Why two types?  I think some devices use PIO on a PC and MMIO on other 
architectures.  Sharing the type would allow sharing code.

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