On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 11:06:41AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 09/03/2012 06:01, David Gibson ha scritto:
> > +static inline int dma_memory_read(DMAContext *dma, dma_addr_t addr,
> > + void *buf, dma_addr_t len)
> > +{
> > + return dma_memory_rw(dma, addr, buf, len, DMA_DIRECTION_TO_DEVICE);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static inline int dma_memory_write(DMAContext *dma, dma_addr_t addr,
> > + const void *buf, dma_addr_t len)
> > +{
> > + return dma_memory_rw(dma, addr, (void *)buf, len,
> > + DMA_DIRECTION_FROM_DEVICE);
> > +}
>
> This is opposite to the convention of dma_buf_read/dma_buf_write, which
> is from the point of view of the device.
Uh, these are from the point of view of the device - the device writes
to memory == transfer from device. More importantly, this is the same
convention as cpu_physical_memory_{read,write}() which is what these
generally replace. dma_buf_read() is from the point of view of the
core/memory.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
