From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:34824) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UCboe-0007eP-QP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Mar 2013 15:16:59 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UCbod-0002Md-IN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Mar 2013 15:16:56 -0500 Received: from mail-qe0-f42.google.com ([209.85.128.42]:40241) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UCbod-0002MX-EO for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Mar 2013 15:16:55 -0500 Received: by mail-qe0-f42.google.com with SMTP id f6so4226965qej.29 for ; Mon, 04 Mar 2013 12:16:55 -0800 (PST) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <51350131.1070703@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 04 Mar 2013 21:16:49 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1362418348-27398-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] sysbus: add no_user for devices using mmio or IRQ or GPIO List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Anthony Liguori , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Il 04/03/2013 18:58, Peter Maydell ha scritto: >> > Mass-mark these devices as no_user. > "There is no such thing as a 'no-user' device" -- Anthony > (http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2013-01/msg00896.html) > > We should figure out what we might be trying to use 'no-user' > for, and consistently use it that way. Or alternatively we > should remove it (perhaps replacing it with other flags). > Mass-marking all the sysbus devices when we don't have a > consistent sane defined semantics for the flag seems like > a bad idea. $ x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64 -device xlnx,,ps7-usb (qemu) info qtree bus: main-system-bus type System dev: xlnx,ps7-usb, id "" maxframes = 128 irq 1 mmio ffffffffffffffff/0000000000001000 bus: usb-bus.0 type usb-bus I have no idea what this means, but I'm pretty sure that no matter how I configure it, it will never work. Yes, the right thing to do would be to QOMify memory regions and introduce pins, but that's a bit more than the amount of time I have now for this. Paolo