Quoting Michael Roth (2015-07-23 16:38:19) > Quoting Peter Maydell (2015-07-23 16:24:20) > > On 23 July 2015 at 22:19, Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > On 23 July 2015 at 22:10, Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote: > > >> On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 10:00:30PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > > >>> (Also, none of our PCI device models actually try to do > > >>> the "BAR at zero means I won't respond" behaviour, which > > >>> presumably they might do in real life.) > > > > > >> Maybe some devices do this, but I'm guessing not all of them, > > >> since there's no hint in the pci spec that they should. > > > > > > I think this depends on which version of the spec you > > > read. > > > > Bikeshedding about ancient specs aside, I think it's the > > bugs in the PC model's memory region priorities that > > are the real reason the special case of zero is sticking > > around. If we fixed those we should be able to drop it. > > What's the intended fix? That legacy/platform regions > should hide any regions a guest attempts to map over it?
nm, i see this was already covered :) I seem to recall Michael suggesting it may have already been fixed on x86. I think we had a TODO to figure out all the architectures that don't use IO windows and figure out if they need a fix as well. > > > > > -- PMM > > > >
