From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LclZb-0008Cj-5N
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 14:07:07 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1LclZZ-0008Bv-KS
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 14:07:06 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39741 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LclZZ-0008Bo-Fq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 14:07:05 -0500
Received: from mail-bw0-f171.google.com ([209.85.218.171]:38015)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <blauwirbel@gmail.com>) id 1LclZZ-0005He-0H
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 14:07:05 -0500
Received: by bwz19 with SMTP id 19so613250bwz.34
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 11:07:04 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <49A68893.7090102@earthlink.net>
References: <49A68893.7090102@earthlink.net>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:07:02 +0200
Message-ID: <f43fc5580902261107o28b9c69w33c4b49f8ffb7c97@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] 64 bit I/O v3
From: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
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 2/26/09, Robert Reif <reif@earthlink.net> wrote:
> This is the third version of adding 64 bit I/O support to QEMU.

>   int cpu_register_io_memory(int io_index,
>                             CPUReadMemoryFunc **mem_read,
>                             CPUWriteMemoryFunc **mem_write,
>                             void *opaque)
>   {
>  -    int i, subwidth = 0;
>  +    if (io_index <= 0) {
>  +        io_index = get_free_io_mem_idx();
>  +        if (io_index == -1)
>  +            return io_index;
>  +    } else {
>  +        if (io_index >= IO_MEM_NB_ENTRIES)
>  +            return -1;
>  +    }
>
>  +    io_mem_read[io_index].b = mem_read[0];
>  +    io_mem_write[io_index].b = mem_write[0];
>  +
>  +    io_mem_read[io_index].w = mem_read[1];
>  +    io_mem_write[io_index].w = mem_write[1];
>  +
>  +    io_mem_read[io_index].l = mem_read[2];
>  +    io_mem_write[io_index].l = mem_write[2];
>  +
>  +    io_mem_read[io_index].q = NULL;
>  +    io_mem_write[io_index].q = NULL;
>  +
>  +    io_mem_opaque[io_index] = opaque;
>  +    return (io_index << IO_MEM_SHIFT) | IO_MEM_SUBWIDTH;
>  +}

I think for 64 bit accesses the default should be emulation using two
32 bit accesses instead of NULL (unassigned).