On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 11:57:26AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 25/08/2017 11:22, Peter Maydell wrote: > > On 25 August 2017 at 09:53, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> The solution is to: 1) share the FlatView structures if they refer to > >> the same root memory region; 2) have one AddressSpaceDispatch per > >> FlatView instead of one per AddressSpace, so that FlatView reference > >> counting takes care of clearing the AddressSpaceDispatch too. Neither > >> is particularly hard. > > If we did this we could get rid of address_space_init_shareable(), > > right? (It's a bit of a cheesy hack aimed at avoiding having duplicate > > address space structures for the same root memory region, but if > > the underlying code is better at not duplicating all the data > > structures unless necessary then the benefit of having the > > separate API goes away I think.) > > Yes, indeed.
Hm. Why do we need to construct full ASes for virtio-blk, rather than
just MRs?
--
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
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
