On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 02:43:17PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 27 April 2015 at 14:41, Christoffer Dall <christoffer.d...@linaro.org> > wrote: > > Regarding adding support for the security extensions later, I assume the > > QEMU-specifics will be to add a flag to the device instantiation from > > the containing board activating security support, which would grow the > > IO region size of this device from 4K to 8K for an adjacent secure > > register frame and adjust the offsets. I cannot think of a reason why > > that wouldn't work backwards-compatibly? > > I think you'd probably want to add a second MMIO region rather > than making the first one double-size. I don't think there's anything > in the spec that mandates them being adjacent. You also need to allocate > more interrupt lines.
Right; the spec actually says they are NOT required to be adjacent. > > I think this should all be backwards-compatible, yes. > ok - thanks, -Christoffer
