On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 06:23:41PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 08/03/2011 06:16 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>
> >> Well, the reason we have this logic here, I think, is
> >> to make sure it runs before the guest accesses
> >> the configuration with a write access.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure
On 08/03/2011 06:16 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
> Well, the reason we have this logic here, I think, is
> to make sure it runs before the guest accesses
> the configuration with a write access.
>
> I'm not sure why we don't do this in the init
> callback - Anthony?
So the following shou
On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 01:23:22PM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 12:35:44PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On 08/01/2011 11:26 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > >>
> > >> static void virtio_write_config(PCIDevice *pci_dev, uint32_t address,
> > >>
On 08/02/11 11:17, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/01/2011 10:53 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
>
> Just because a memory region becomes visible to the cpu is no reason
> to have a callback. From the device perspective, it can't tell that
> it happened.
BTW this is what qxl does, too, conceptually: on
On 08/02/2011 12:34 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 12:17:06PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 08/01/2011 10:53 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Just because a memory region becomes visible to the cpu is no reason
> >> to have a callback. From the device
On Tue, Aug 02, 2011 at 12:17:06PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 08/01/2011 10:53 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Just because a memory region becomes visible to the cpu is no reason
> >> to have a callback. From the device perspective, it can't tell that
> >> it happened.
> >
> >B
On 08/01/2011 10:53 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
>
> Just because a memory region becomes visible to the cpu is no reason
> to have a callback. From the device perspective, it can't tell that
> it happened.
BTW this is what qxl does, too, conceptually: on config writes, it peeks
at the ba
On 08/01/2011 05:23 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 12:35:44PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
On 08/01/2011 11:26 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
static void virtio_write_config(PCIDevice *pci_dev, uint32_t address,
uint32_t val, int len)
On 08/01/2011 03:26 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 08:57:43PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
@@ -491,30 +473,26 @@ static void virtio_pci_config_writel(void *opaque,
uint32_t addr, uint32_t val)
virtio_config_writel(proxy->vdev, addr, val);
}
-static void virtio_map(PC
On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 12:35:44PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 08/01/2011 11:26 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>
> >> static void virtio_write_config(PCIDevice *pci_dev, uint32_t address,
> >> uint32_t val, int len)
> >> {
> >> VirtIOPCIProxy *proxy =
On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 12:35:44PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 08/01/2011 11:26 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>
> >> static void virtio_write_config(PCIDevice *pci_dev, uint32_t address,
> >> uint32_t val, int len)
> >> {
> >> VirtIOPCIProxy *proxy =
On 08/01/2011 11:26 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>
> static void virtio_write_config(PCIDevice *pci_dev, uint32_t address,
> uint32_t val, int len)
> {
> VirtIOPCIProxy *proxy = DO_UPCAST(VirtIOPCIProxy, pci_dev, pci_dev);
> +VirtIODevice *vdev =
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 08:57:43PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> @@ -491,30 +473,26 @@ static void virtio_pci_config_writel(void *opaque,
> uint32_t addr, uint32_t val)
> virtio_config_writel(proxy->vdev, addr, val);
> }
>
> -static void virtio_map(PCIDevice *pci_dev, int region_num,
> -
except msix.
[jan: fix build]
Signed-off-by: Avi Kivity
---
hw/virtio-pci.c | 74 ++
hw/virtio-pci.h |2 +-
2 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 45 deletions(-)
diff --git a/hw/virtio-pci.c b/hw/virtio-pci.c
index d685243..c114e1a 100644
14 matches
Mail list logo
