Anthony Liguori wrote: > Let me clarify this a bit more. The problem we're trying to address > today is the encapsulating knowledge of phys_ram_base. We want to > minimize the amount of code that makes any assumptions about > phys_ram_base. Your current API still accesses phys_ram_base directly > in the PCI DMA API. The only real improvement compared to the current > virtio code is that you properly handle MMIO. This is not just about > layout but this also includes the fact that in the future, guest memory > could be discontiguous in QEMU (think memory hotplug).
One little extra thing: What about PCI DMA to another PCI device, not to RAM? That's not used very often, but it ought to work. -- Jamie -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
