From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54741)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <afaerber@suse.de>) id 1V7pss-0000YS-1G
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Aug 2013 12:49:57 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <afaerber@suse.de>) id 1V7psk-0007Rr-0O
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Aug 2013 12:49:49 -0400
Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:40503 helo=mx2.suse.de)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <afaerber@suse.de>) id 1V7psj-0007RX-R1
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Aug 2013 12:49:41 -0400
Message-ID: <52051DA1.8060004@suse.de>
Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2013 18:49:37 +0200
From: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= <afaerber@suse.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <51FCBFCD.5020608@web.de>
	<CAFEAcA82uA4KON=rXoertgMtL1ZXCpaWFvicZAjB+ZOfG4fK0w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5203BC8A.8040605@siemens.com> <52049D1B.1080103@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <52049D1B.1080103@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] memory: Provide separate handling of
 unassigned io ports accesses
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: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>

Am 09.08.2013 09:41, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
> Il 08/08/2013 17:43, Jan Kiszka ha scritto:
>> On 2013-08-08 17:33, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> On 3 August 2013 09:31, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de> wrote:
>>>> --- a/ioport.c
>>>> +++ b/ioport.c
>>>> @@ -44,6 +44,22 @@ typedef struct MemoryRegionPortioList {
>>>>      MemoryRegionPortio ports[];
>>>>  } MemoryRegionPortioList;
>>>>
>>>> +static uint64_t unassigned_io_read(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, unsig=
ned size)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    return -1UL;
>>>
>>> This should probably be "-1ULL", otherwise we'll return
>>> different values on 32 bit and 64 bit hosts. (Actually
>>> managing a 64 bit read of the i/o space is pretty
>>> unlikely, though possibly alpha memory-mapped via the
>>> PCI space might let you do it.)
>>
>> No problem with changing this - but wouldn't 64-bit i/o accesses be a
>> bug? It's not allowed according to PCI, no device can handle it
>> (officially), so no arch should forward such requests from mmio, rathe=
r
>> break them up first.
>=20
> Yes, the impl.max_access_size should never be 8.  Though 1ULL would be
> clearer perhaps.

Let's CC rth.

Andreas

--=20
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=C3=BCrnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imend=C3=B6rffer; HRB 16746 AG N=C3=BC=
rnberg