On 14 September 2011 10:23, Avi Kivity <a...@redhat.com> wrote: > This patchset introduces memory_region_set_enabled() and > memory_region_set_address() to avoid the requirement on memory > routers to track the internal state of the memory API (so they know > whether they need to add or remove a region). Instead, they can > simply copy the state of the region from the guest-exposed register > to the memory core, via the new mutator functions. > > Please review. Do we need a memory_region_set_size() as well?
Would set_size() allow things like omap_gpmc() to avoid the need to create an intermediate container subregion to enforce size clipping on the child region it's trying to map? (Strictly speaking what omap_gpmc() wants is not merely clipping to a guest-specified size but also wrapping, so you can take a 16MB child region and map the bottom 4MB of it repeating into a 32MB chunk of address space, say. But that would require a lot of playing games with aliases to implement a bizarre corner case that nobody uses in practice.) -- PMM
