On 06/09/2010 05:54 AM, Paul Brook wrote:
quoted text
>> On 06/08/2010 09:30 PM, Paul Brook wrote:
>>      
>>>> The offset given to a block created via qemu_ram_alloc/map() is
>>>> arbitrary, let the caller specify a name so we can make a positive
>>>> match.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> @@ -1924,7 +1925,9 @@ static int pci_add_option_rom(PCIDevice *pdev)
>>>> +    snprintf(name, sizeof(name), "pci:%02x.%x.rom",
>>>> +             PCI_SLOT(pdev->devfn), PCI_FUNC(pdev->devfn));
>>>> +    pdev->rom_offset = qemu_ram_alloc(name, size);
>>>>          
>>> This looks pretty bogus.  It should be associated with the device, rather
>>> than incorrectly trying to generate a globally unique name.
>>>        
>> Not all ram is associated with a device.
>>      
> Maybe not, but where it is we should be using that information.
> Absolute minimum we should be using the existing qdev address rather than
> inventing a new one.  Duplicating this logic inside every device seems like a
> bad idea so I suggest identifying ram blocks by a (name, device) pair. For now
> we can allow a NULL device for system memory.
>
>    

I agree, this is duplicating the qdev tree in a string.  Devices/BARs 
should have ram qdev fields and so ram can be enumerated completely via 
qdev.

System memory can be part of a system device.

-- 
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@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html