From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KuVbZ-0001YY-D4
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 13:10:13 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KuVbX-0001YL-T4
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 13:10:13 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37079 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KuVbX-0001YI-QN
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 13:10:11 -0400
Received: from mail-gx0-f17.google.com ([209.85.217.17]:57635)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <blauwirbel@gmail.com>) id 1KuVbX-0007fS-HR
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 13:10:11 -0400
Received: by gxk10 with SMTP id 10so2716143gxk.10
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 27 Oct 2008 10:10:11 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <f43fc5580810271010l1161e0d8n3b8b3476b224f1f9@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:10:10 +0200
From: "Blue Swirl" <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/3] sh4: mmio based CF support on r2d board.
In-Reply-To: <fb249edb0810261829g7b5aac5fw80ddbaf2ddb72bcf@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <20080923013136.490117fd.yoshii.takashi@gmail.com>
	<200810261517.m9QFHUR4026096@smtp12.dti.ne.jp>
	<f43fc5580810260854q41264525xdaf9199686d9dcb8@mail.gmail.com>
	<fb249edb0810261829g7b5aac5fw80ddbaf2ddb72bcf@mail.gmail.com>
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 10/27/08, andrzej zaborowski <balrogg@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2008/10/26 Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>:
>  > It would be better to make the init function take instead of mmio
>  > pointer, two target_phys_addr_t parameters and do the physical memory
>  > registration there.
>
>
> Why would it be better?  This implementation seems more flexible.

How is this more flexible? Now r2d.c has to know the number of
registers in the IDE controller which should be internal to ide.c.