On Mon, 2015-09-28 at 17:35 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Ian, > > On 25/09/15 17:36, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 15:51 +0100, Julien Grall wrote: > > > From: Julien Grall <julien.gr...@linaro.org> > > > > > > Rather than letting each handler to retrieve the register used by the > > > I/O access, add a new parameter to pass the register in parameter. > > > > > > This will help to implement generic register manipulation on I/O > > > access > > > such as sign-extension and endianess. > > > > > > Read handlers need to modify the value of the register, so a pointer > > > to > > > it is given in argument. Write handlers shouldn't modify the > > > register, > > > therfore only a plain value is given. > > > > "therefore" > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.gr...@citrix.com> > > > > Acked-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campb...@citrix.com. > > > > Is it the case that read handlers today only update *r on success? > > Yes, each read handler only update the register mentioned in dabt.reg.
I meant that they do not touch it on failure. > > Is that > > a useful thing to mandate and/or enforce? > > What do you mean? > > Regards, > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
