qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/8] memory: remove old_portio usage


From: Jan Kiszka
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/8] memory: remove old_portio usage
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 20:11:55 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); de; rv:1.8.1.12) Gecko/20080226 SUSE/2.0.0.12-1.1 Thunderbird/2.0.0.12 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666

On 2013-06-18 20:09, Hervé Poussineau wrote:
> Jan Kiszka a écrit :
>> On 2013-06-17 22:39, Hervé Poussineau wrote:
>>> Jan Kiszka a écrit :
>>>> On 2013-06-17 09:32, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>>>> Il 16/06/2013 20:20, Hervé Poussineau ha scritto:
>>>>>> Hervé Poussineau a écrit :
>>>>>>> These proposed patches aim at removing the .old_portio member of
>>>>>>> MemoryRegionOps structure, and replacing their usage by .read/.write
>>>>>>> handlers.
>>>>>> Ping.
>>>>> Jan has patches that do something similar, so I was hoping he'd look at 
>>>>> it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jan, are you back from vacation? :)
>>>> Yes, and that is the problem. ;)
>>>>
>>>> >From a quick glance, I'm a bit skeptical, Hervé, that your patches are
>>>> addressing all corner cases like mine. Did you see
>>>> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/210188?
>>>>
>>>> Jan
>>>>
>>> My patches are less intrusive than yours, because they are probably less 
>>> complex. They don't change subpage handling, they don't remove the 
>>> register_ioport_*, and they don't move ioport handling to memory core.
>>>
>>> However, my patches do not add a new base address field in MemoryRegion, 
>>> and also simplify cpu_in/out to be simply a call to 
>>> address_space_read/write (like yours).
>>>
>>> I don't really care whatever way is chosen. I'm only interested to be 
>>> able to put I/O address space into memory space, so I can improve PReP 
>>> emulation.
>>
>> Refactorings like the subpage changes are required to break up the BQL
>> also for PIO dispatching. So we need the complete rework. But, of
>> course, I'm open for improvement suggestions.
>>
>> I'm planning to rebase my series on top of Paolo's changes soon and will
>> then post. Would you mind rebasing what you need additionally on top of
>> that?
> 
> Not a problem.
> Moreover, with your patches, if devices registering ports with portio_* 
> functions can be added in the system memory address space, it will be 
> enough for me, and I'll happily drop my patches.

Sorry, forgot to CC you. Please check
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.emulators.qemu/218193.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SES-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]