On 23/02/2017 15:35, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 23 February 2017 at 12:53, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> >> On 23/02/2017 13:26, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> On 23 February 2017 at 11:43, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>> On 23/02/2017 12:34, Peter Maydell wrote: >>>>> We should probably update the doc comment to note that the >>>>> pointer is to host-endianness memory (and that this is not >>>>> like normal RAM which is target-endian)... >>>> >>>> I wouldn't call it host-endianness memory, and I disagree that normal >>>> RAM is target-endian---in both cases it's just a bunch of bytes. >>>> >>>> However, the access done by the MemoryRegionOps callbacks needs to match >>>> the endianness declared by the MemoryRegionOps themselves. >>> >>> Well, if the guest stores a bunch of integers to the memory, which >>> way round do you see them when you look at the bunch of bytes? >> >> You see them in whatever endianness the guest used. > > I'm confused. I said "normal RAM and this ramdevice memory are > different", and you seem to be saying they're the same. I don't > think they are (in particular I think with a BE guest on an > LE host they'll look different).
No, they look entirely the same. The only difference is that they go through MemoryRegionOps instead of memcpy. Paolo
