Hi, On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hi, > >> Maybe instead (or in addition to), we should provide a dummy >> read or write functions -- instead of fixing each such occurence >> to use its own dummy function > > Makes sense, especially for write where we can just ignore what the > guest attempts to write. Not sure we can have a generic handler for > reads. Maybe two, one which returns 0xff and one which returns 0x00. >
FWIW, I have one in my tree that qemu_log(LOG_GUEST_ERROR's such accesses that I use for unimplemented devices. It's worthwhile to trap such accesses and speaking for the Xilinx LQSPI case, my preference is for some form of failure rather than silent write-ignore. And can we have an option where a invalid writes have consistent behavior with unassigned accesses? Regards, Peter > cheers, > Gerd > >
