[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] vga: Fix portio list conversion fallouts
From: |
Jan Kiszka |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] vga: Fix portio list conversion fallouts |
Date: |
Sun, 18 Sep 2011 21:07:40 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); de; rv:1.8.1.12) Gecko/20080226 SUSE/2.0.0.12-1.1 Thunderbird/2.0.0.12 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 |
On 2011-09-18 18:51, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 09/18/2011 07:28 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> On 2011-09-18 17:51, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> > On 09/18/2011 03:44 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> >> From: Jan Kiszka<address@hidden>
>> >>
>> >> Fix copy&paste errors and reduce duplications of the BOCHS VBE
>> ranges.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka<address@hidden>
>> >> ---
>> >>
>> >> #ifdef CONFIG_BOCHS_VBE
>> >> static const MemoryRegionPortio vbe_portio_list[] = {
>> >> -# ifdef TARGET_I386
>> >> { 0, 1, 2, .read = vbe_ioport_read_index, .write =
>> >> vbe_ioport_write_index },
>> >> +# ifdef TARGET_I386
>> >
>> > Strange how the card knows what target it's plugged into. Fixing this
>> > is going to involve major pain - need to update the bios and need to
>> > provide backwards compatibility. All this assuming guests don't
>> > hardcode the address.
>> >
>> > Anyway I find the deduplication makes the code harder to read.
>>
>> That line is rather tricky to deduplicate in mind. So it's not nice for
>> our readers keeping it duplicated around.
>
> I don't think it should be deduplicated. The device is providing two
> separate ABIs.
Yes, two ABIs, and the only difference is the offset of the data register.
>
>> >
>> >> { 1, 1, 2, .read = vbe_ioport_read_data, .write =
>> >> vbe_ioport_write_data },
>> >> # else
>> >> - { 0, 2, 2, .read = vbe_ioport_read_index, .write =
>> >> vbe_ioport_write_index },
>> >> - { 2, 2, 2, .read = vbe_ioport_read_data, .write =
>> >> vbe_ioport_write_data },
>> >> + { 2, 1, 2, .read = vbe_ioport_read_data, .write =
>> >> vbe_ioport_write_data },
>> >
>> > Is this correct? length 1 region with size 2?
>>
>> Yes, it prevents accesses on base+1.
>>
>
> Why disallow it?
Did anyone check that something useful or at least valid comes out of
the handlers when doing this so far impossible access?
Jan
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature