On 14/06/15 13:57, Robert Millan wrote:
The print still doesn't match the call. How do you know at that
abstraction level that initiopl() will exactly "raise I/O privilege
level"?
Well that's what "iopl" stands for! Perhaps we should pick another name?
:-)
Good point.
Btw, iopl() is a Linux-ism. An x86-ism even, IIRC. For example the
FreeBSD/x86 way is open("/dev/io"). Maybe use something more generic like:
rumpcomp_pci_initio()
?
Sounds good to me.
Also, do we still need RUMP_PCI_IOSPACE? Or can we say that
everything providing iospace access must now define
rumpcomp_pci_initiopl?
A rumpcomp_pci_initiopl() dummy stub is cheap, seems reasonable to
assume it's present.
As long as init$whatever means "initialize io space and return error
code", you can just #define foo 0 in features.
