On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:26:35AM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > On Mon, 25 May 2020 at 11:20, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote: > > Not all of them, only those that need to return MEMTX_ERROR. I would > > like some guidance from Peter as to whether (or when) reads from ROMs > > should return MEMTX_ERROR. This way, we can use that information to > > device what the read-only ram-device regions should do. > > In general I think writes to ROMs (and indeed reads from ROMs) should > not return MEMTX_ERROR. I think that in real hardware you could have > a ROM that behaved either way; so our default behaviour should probably > be to do what we've always done and not report a MEMTX_ERROR. (If we > needed to I suppose we should implement a MEMTX_ERROR-reporting ROM, > but to be honest there aren't really many real ROMs in systems these > days: it's more often flash, whose response to writes is defined > by the spec and is I think to ignore writes which aren't the > magic "shift to program-the-flash-mode" sequence.) > then should I just drop the writes to read-only ram-device regions and vfio regions without returning MEMTX_ERROR? do you think it's good?
Thanks Yan
