On 08/22/2012 02:47 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >> >> Ok, so IIUC, that means we do need the cpu_physical_memory_write_rom() >> version for load_image_targphys(), and so my original patch is >> basically the right fix. > > Sure it is, I don't think anyone argued about that :). But it's duplicating > code in a slow path. So my proposal was instead of doing the write manually > in the "this is read-write RAM" case, just fall back to the known-to-work > cpu_physical_memory_rw for those pages. That would make the rom function > smaller, more obvious and duplicate less code.
I think there were patches (from Xen) extracting that snippet into a helper. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
