On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 17:43:07 +0000
Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 28 March 2014 17:37, Greg Kurz <gk...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > And while we are at it, since we pass &address_space_memory to all
> > occurences of virtio_*_phys() and I don't see why we would change
> > that, maybe we can also move that into the helpers. Thoughts ?
>
> In the longer term I'm hoping that references to
> &address_space_memory go away -- we should be modelling
> separate address spaces per CPU and per every other
> thing that can act as a DMA master (ie issue memory
> transactions). I'm not sure exactly how virtio ought to
> work since these accesses directly to memory are a total
> hack, but probably we will end up setting the virtio
> device up and handing it an AddressSpace* that it should use.
>
Ok, I am now convinced. Let's make struct VirtIODevice* be the
first argument for all helpers and kill the AddressSpace* one.
Unless you envision we could end up with different address spaces
accross multiple virtio devices, I would then do as proposed
above... Even if we add an AddressSpace* to devices, the API
will remain the same.
> thanks
> -- PMM
>
Cheers.
--
Gregory Kurz kurzg...@fr.ibm.com
gk...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Software Engineer @ IBM/Meiosys http://www.ibm.com
Tel +33 (0)562 165 496
"Anarchy is about taking complete responsibility for yourself."
Alan Moore.
