On 11/07/13 22:21, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 07/11/2013 22:12, Laszlo Ersek ha scritto: >> 0000000000000000-7ffffffffffffffe (prio 0, RW): system >> [...] >> 0000000060000000-00000000ffffffff (prio 0, RW): alias pci-hole @pci >> 0000000060000000-00000000ffffffff >> [...] >> 00000000ffe00000-00000000ffffffff (prio 0, R-): system.flash >> [...] > > Priorities are not "transitive" across aliases; once you use an alias to > map a region, the alias's priority counts, not the target region's > priority. So the INT_MIN priority for pci-master-abort counts *within > the alias*, but the choice between pci-hole and system.flash is only > affected by the priorities of pci-hole and system.flash.
Right. It's also documented in docs/memory.txt -- Peter's recent addition I think? > You could give a smaller priority (-1 or INT_MIN) to pci-hole and just > let it occupy the whole address space, from 0 to UINT64_MAX. Or perhaps > the pci-hole alias is too large and it should end before the system > flash area. Both solutions should work. I did reorder pci-hole and system.flash, but rather than lowering pci-hole, I raised system.flash. I have no preference. Thanks Laszlo
