From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53350) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ya4Gn-0000KV-GV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 11:28:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ya4Gj-0007ep-Pb for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 11:28:01 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:43864) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Ya4Gj-0007ef-Ka for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 11:27:57 -0400 Message-ID: <551030F7.6030702@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 16:27:51 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <55102594.6000902@redhat.com> <55102EB4.6010106@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] RFC: memory API changes List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Peter Crosthwaite , QEMU Developers , Greg Bellows , "Edgar E. Iglesias" , =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= , Richard Henderson On 23/03/2015 16:26, Peter Maydell wrote: > > True. But since it's not a new API we can keep the old name for the > > simple one. > > ...except that means that the function you should in > general not be using as default is the one with the short > name, which is the wrong way round. We should be guiding > people writing new code to think about the required > behaviour on memory transaction failure (and attributes) > as they write the code, not making it easy for them to > ignore the issue... Not necessarily, for example PCI devices can certainly use the short name. Paolo