On 06/11/2012 06:01 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
On 06/11/2012 08:39 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
On 11 June 2012 14:15, Anthony Liguori<address@hidden> wrote:
From what you said earlier, it's basically:
'write data to this address'
'read data from this address'
An interface that implements this is DMAContext. Forget about the
fact that
'DMA' is in the name. It's really the symmetric version of a
MemoryRegion.
...so can we fix the name?
Perhaps we should just make MemoryRegion work in both directions?
Ben/Avi, what do you guys think?
The other direction is currently cpu_physical_memory_rw(). We do need
to support issuing transactions from arbitrary points in the memory
hierarchy, but I don't think a device's MemoryRegion is the right
interface. Being able to respond to memory transactions, and being able
to issue them are two different things.
In fact we will probably have to add more details to the memory
hierarchy. Currently (for example) we model the memory hub passing
transactions destined for the various pci windows to the pci bus, but we
don't model the memory hub receiving a pci-initiated transaction and
passing it to the system bus. We simply pretend it originated on the
system bus in the first place. Perhaps we need parallel hierarchies:
system_memory
alias -> pci
alias -> ram
pci
bar1
bar2
pcibm
alias -> pci (prio 1)
alias -> system_memory (prio 0)
cpu_physical_memory_rw() would be implemented as
memory_region_rw(system_memory, ...) while pci_dma_rw() would be
implemented as memory_region_rw(pcibm, ...). This would allow different
address transformations for the two accesses.