From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1JA6g4-0005BE-0b
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:42:48 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1JA6g2-00058P-FR
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:42:47 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JA6g2-000588-8a
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:42:46 -0500
Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.184])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <blauwirbel@gmail.com>) id 1JA6g2-00084t-1l
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:42:46 -0500
Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id 30so381917nfu.12
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 02 Jan 2008 08:42:44 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <f43fc5580801020842x5b0c5e87y9ebf58a003f5e076@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 18:42:44 +0200
From: "Blue Swirl" <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] qemu cpu-all.h exec.c
In-Reply-To: <477AB3D4.5080106@bellard.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <E1J9kQZ-0006Tj-Gh@cvs.savannah.gnu.org>
	<477AB3D4.5080106@bellard.org>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 1/1/08, Fabrice Bellard <fabrice@bellard.org> wrote:
> This patch breaks the behaviour of the memory callbacks if the callbacks
> are changed dynamically (see cirrus_update_memory_access() to see what I
> mean). You are lucky that no one does that in the subpage case !

I'll change the function pointer to a pointer to function pointer.

Also the opaque parameter may need to be different for each function,
it just didn't matter for the unassigned memory case.