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

Reply via email to