From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52427) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Veofu-00038U-Az for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Nov 2013 11:12:52 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Veofo-0002o3-CZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Nov 2013 11:12:46 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:2019) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Veofn-0002nb-S5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 08 Nov 2013 11:12:40 -0500 Message-ID: <527D0D62.7020508@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 17:12:18 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1383511723-11228-1-git-send-email-marcel.a@redhat.com> <527C023F.2060506@redhat.com> <1383859470.2527.64.camel@localhost.localdomain> <527C06B5.2020401@redhat.com> <1383860314.2527.72.camel@localhost.localdomain> <527C9B4C.9000405@redhat.com> <1383923328.2527.91.camel@localhost.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <1383923328.2527.91.camel@localhost.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] exec: fix regression by making system-memory region UINT64_MAX size List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Marcel Apfelbaum Cc: Peter Maydell , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Jan Kiszka , "edk2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net" , qemu-devel , Laszlo Ersek , Anthony Liguori , Jordan Justen , afaerber , Richard Henderson Il 08/11/2013 16:08, Marcel Apfelbaum ha scritto: > Actually, as I see, the default behavior of "system" memory region > is to use unassigned_mem_ops that has valid.accepts method returning > false (no read/write methods). I don't see that read all-ones/ignore > writes is implemented. Right, it's read-all-zeroes (see unassigned_mem_read). It was read-all-ones for a brief time, then it got changed back to read-all-zeroes. > This was the main reason I submitted this patch. I had *no* clue that > it would impact so much the system... Yeah, it's not your fault. But it should have been held back until 1.8. Do you agree with reverting it? > I still think the patch is needed ans the guests will benefit from > more accurate PCI spec emulation. Only buggy guests :) but yes, I agree it's a good thing to have. Paolo