On 9 November 2015 at 11:19, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On 09/11/2015 12:09, Peter Maydell wrote: >>>> >> I could have handled that by making the CPU init code always >>>> >> register two ASes (using the same one twice if the board code >>>> >> only passes one or using system_address_space twice if the >>>> >> board code doesn't pass one at all), but that seemed a bit wasteful. >>> > >>> > I think it's simpler though. Complicating the init code is better than >>> > handling the condition throughout all the helpers... >> It was the overhead of having an extra AddressSpace that concerned >> me (plus it shows up in things like 'info mtree' somewhat confusingly >> if you didn't expect your board to really have 2 ASes). > > I don't think it shows up twice with address_space_init_shareable, does it?
Yes, looking at the code you're right. -- PMM
