From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:39503)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1S9YhS-0002tQ-M1
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 05:16:26 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1S9YhO-0007vk-35
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 05:16:22 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:15843)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1S9YhN-0007vY-RK
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Mar 2012 05:16:18 -0400
Message-ID: <4F66F95D.4000608@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 11:16:13 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1331227233-18601-1-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com>
	<1331227233-18601-6-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com>
	<CAETRQWkLdzRpmKL_dL=fg4yVfdiKEHET9kb7NHw6swyAxLaKJQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAETRQWkLdzRpmKL_dL=fg4yVfdiKEHET9kb7NHw6swyAxLaKJQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/5] memory: get rid of
	cpu_register_io_memory()
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: TeLeMan <geleman@gmail.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 03/19/2012 06:52 AM, TeLeMan wrote:
> >  static bool memory_region_wrong_endianness(MemoryRegion *mr)
> > @@ -942,7 +940,7 @@ void memory_region_init_io(MemoryRegion *mr,
> >     mr->opaque = opaque;
> >     mr->terminates = true;
> >     mr->destructor = memory_region_destructor_iomem;
> > -    mr->ram_addr = cpu_register_io_memory(mr);
> > +    mr->ram_addr = ~(ram_addr_t)0;
> Why not 0 but -1?
>

To catch bugs.  In fact it triggered bugs (not the ones I wanted though).

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