Hi Alex,
On 04/27/2015 09:41 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> --- a/hw/arm/virt.c
>> +++ b/hw/arm/virt.c
>> @@ -131,6 +138,7 @@ static const MemMapEntry a15memmap[] = {
>> [VIRT_FW_CFG] = { 0x09020000, 0x0000000a },
>> [VIRT_MMIO] = { 0x0a000000, 0x00000200 },
>> /* ...repeating for a total of NUM_VIRTIO_TRANSPORTS, each of that
>> size */
>> + [VIRT_PLATFORM_BUS] = { 0x0c000000, 0x02000000 },
>
> Peter, would you have a hard time if we just get rid of VIRT_MMIO completely
> and allow users to create the mmio-virtio bridges using -device for -M
> virt-2.4 and above?
>
> At the end of the day, I'm fairly sure people will end up virtio-pci anyway
> and it's just a big waste of address space to keep VIRT_MMIO around, no?
I'm not sure I have an opinion one way or the other, but I would like to
understand the "big waste" argument. Is there something that users are eager
to reuse this address space for, like more RAM?
Thanks,
Chris
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
