On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 04:29:18PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote: > On 07/14/2010 03:13 PM, Paul Brook wrote: >> Well, ok, the function name needs fixing too. However I think the only thing >> missing from the current API is that it does not provide a way to determine >> which device is performing the access. > > I agree with Paul. > > The right approach IMHO is to convert devices to use bus-specific > functions to access memory. The bus specific functions should have a > device argument as the first parameter. If this means a seperate interface for device dma accesses and not fold that functionality into the cpu_physical_memory* interface I agree too :-) Joerg -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
