From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36282)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1Ya6dK-0000Np-Db
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 13:59:27 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1Ya6dH-0004wl-6O
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 13:59:26 -0400
Received: from mail-ig0-f182.google.com ([209.85.213.182]:37056)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <peter.maydell@linaro.org>) id 1Ya6dH-0004wh-1N
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 13:59:23 -0400
Received: by igcqo1 with SMTP id qo1so45885252igc.0
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 10:59:22 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5510529B.9000703@suse.de>
References: <CAFEAcA-8AmagfK1NBE02J7kLEvVNdcm_oRbEmJpWAArL-2jc2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<55102594.6000902@redhat.com> <5510529B.9000703@suse.de>
From: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 17:59:01 +0000
Message-ID: <CAFEAcA8b48vFYL_U2p=BsRhP3HXZCChxk48zdPqSft+DaAmH7w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] RFC: memory API changes
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: =?UTF-8?Q?Andreas_F=C3=A4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>
Cc: Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com>, Greg Bellows <greg.bellows@linaro.org>, QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, "Edgar E. Iglesias" <edgar.iglesias@gmail.com>, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>

On 23 March 2015 at 17:51, Andreas F=C3=A4rber <afaerber@suse.de> wrote:
> Am 23.03.2015 um 15:39 schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
>> On 23/03/2015 13:24, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> The point of indicating failure via MemTxResult is that at
>>> some point we need to correct the current broken handling of
>>> the CPUClass do_unassigned_access hook, because that should
>>> only be invoked if the CPU itself does an access to an unassigned
>>> address, not if some random DMA'ing device does!
>>
>> 100% agreement on this.
>
> Just to clarify, CPUClass::do_unassigned_access() was a simple
> refactoring towards multi-target builds (~two inline functions remain).
>
> If you rather need it on MemoryRegion level or somewhere else, feel free
> to post patches, just please keep the original goal in mind.

Yes, the change here would just be to hoist the callsite
for the hook up to somewhere else, probably io_read*/io_write*
but at any rate somewhere which is in the "definitely only
for CPU generated loads and stores" code path.

-- PMM