On 06/28/2011 01:28 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
On 2011-06-28 12:03, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> +struct MemoryRegion {
>> + /* All fields are private - violators will be prosecuted */
>> + const MemoryRegionOps *ops;
>> + MemoryRegion *parent;
>> + uint64_t size;
>> + target_phys_addr_t addr;
>> + target_phys_addr_t offset;
>> + ram_addr_t ram_addr;
>> + bool has_ram_addr;
>> + MemoryRegion *alias;
>> + target_phys_addr_t alias_offset;
>> + unsigned priority;
>> + bool may_overlap;
>> + QTAILQ_HEAD(subregions, MemoryRegion) subregions;
>> + QTAILQ_ENTRY(MemoryRegion) subregions_link;
>> + QTAILQ_HEAD(coalesced_ranges, CoalescedMemoryRange) coalesced;
>> + const char *name;
>
> I'm never completely sure whether these should be target addresses
> or bus addresses or just uint64_t.
> With pci on a 32 bit system you can stick a 64 bit address
> in a BAR and the result will be that it is never accessed
> from the CPU.
>
Memory regions are not bound to any current or future PCI
specifications. Any fixed bit width would be wrong here, ie. size should
rather be target_phys_addr_t.
The point is that different buses have different widths.
target_phys_addr_t matches just one bus in the system. It needs to be
the maximum size of all buses present to be useful.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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
