From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50203) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZCOlt-0000g5-6l for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2015 05:02:37 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZCOlq-0000DA-0n for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2015 05:02:33 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:34402) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZCOlp-0000CW-Ry for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 07 Jul 2015 05:02:29 -0400 References: <1434470874-22573-1-git-send-email-eric.auger@linaro.org> <5587D4AC.1050203@linaro.org> <5587D8DE.3060208@redhat.com> <5587DA3B.60702@linaro.org> <5587DB14.1000207@redhat.com> <5587DC61.60700@linaro.org> <559B9511.5060701@linaro.org> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <559B95A0.6090208@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2015 11:02:24 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <559B9511.5060701@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vl: move rom_load_all after machine init done List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Auger , eric.auger@st.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, peter.maydell@linaro.org, peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com Cc: christoffer.dall@linaro.org, patches@linaro.org On 07/07/2015 11:00, Eric Auger wrote: > Hi Paolo, Peter, > On 06/22/2015 11:58 AM, Eric Auger wrote: >> On 06/22/2015 11:53 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 22/06/2015 11:49, Eric Auger wrote: >>>>>> It seems safe because rom_load_all really doesn't load anything, it only >>>>>> does an overlap check. Is this right? >>>> it does the check + isrom field setting >>>>>> >>>>>> Is the bug that some overlapping ROMs are not detected? The commit >>>>>> message is not clear. >>>> The regression is that the both overlap check and isrom setting are not >>>> done since ROM are inserted in the roms list afterwards, at machine init >>>> done time. The bug was not really observed yet I think. >>> >>> isrom is just an optimization though, right? What is it useful for? >> My understanding is it serves 2 purposes: >> >> - report info in the monitor (hmp_info_roms) >> - decide whether the rom->data can be freed on ROM reset notifier >> (rom_reset). >> >> Hope I didn't miss anything else. >> >> Eric > > What do we decide then about this regression on arm. Do we fix it in 2.4 > or later? Yes, it should be fixed in 2.4. Paolo