From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48851) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YaSys-0003y2-L5 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 13:51:14 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YaSyp-00088i-EY for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 13:51:10 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-x234.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::234]:32816) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YaSyp-00088R-7F for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 13:51:07 -0400 Received: by wixw10 with SMTP id w10so57206247wix.0 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2015 10:51:06 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <5511A405.6090005@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 18:51:01 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <5511787F.40301@redhat.com> <55117DF5.7000408@redhat.com> <1355384493.3824166.1427214234629.JavaMail.zimbra@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 24/03/2015 17:35, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 24 March 2015 at 16:23, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> On 24 March 2015 at 15:08, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>>> On 24/03/2015 15:53, Peter Maydell wrote: >>>>>>> In any case, the removal or segregation of ld/st*_phys should be a >>>>>>> separate series for ease of review. >>>>> Who wants to remove ld/st*_phys? Not me... >>>> >>>> Well, you want to rename them _and_ add new arguments. Basically at the >>>> end they don't exist anymore as we know them now. :) >>> >>> I guess :-) So what exactly would you like to see as a >>> separate series? >> >> Adding the arguments / renaming the functions > > OK. (This will need the patch that actually at least defines > the MemTxAttr and MemTxResult types, obviously.) > >> , for those callers >> of ld/st*_phys that use cs->as as the first argument. > > ...but I don't understand this caveat. I want to add arguments > and rename the functions for *all* callers of ld/st*_phys. > I don't want to specialcase the ones which happen to be > operating on cs->as. The ones that operate on cs->as could become (for some CPUs at least) special-cased accessors like the bus ones; for example building the MemTxAttrs according to internal CPU state. ld/st*_phys actually started as CPU-specific accessors, and most uses are still of that kind, so it makes sense to me that we special-case them. Maybe it limits churn, maybe it doesn't. But if it doesn't, it's not like anything is lost. Paolo