On 11 November 2011 17:40, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote: > Or actually rather this one: > > > Alex > > diff --git a/hw/s390-virtio.c b/hw/s390-virtio.c > index d936809..61b67e8 100644 > --- a/hw/s390-virtio.c > +++ b/hw/s390-virtio.c > @@ -167,6 +167,7 @@ static void s390_init(ram_addr_t my_ram_size, > uint8_t *storage_keys; > void *virtio_region; > target_phys_addr_t virtio_region_len; > + target_phys_addr_t virtio_region_start; > int i; > > /* s390x ram size detection needs a 16bit multiplier + an increment. So > @@ -188,7 +189,9 @@ static void s390_init(ram_addr_t my_ram_size, > > /* clear virtio region */ > virtio_region_len = my_ram_size - ram_size; > - virtio_region = cpu_physical_memory_map(ram_size, &virtio_region_len, > true); > + virtio_region_start = ram_size; > + virtio_region = cpu_physical_memory_map(virtio_region_start, > + &virtio_region_len, true); > memset(virtio_region, 0, virtio_region_len); > cpu_physical_memory_unmap(virtio_region, virtio_region_len, 1, > virtio_region_len);
Yes, that looks OK to me. -- PMM
