Re: [PATCH v4 0/9] memory: assert and define MemoryRegionOps callbacks

[P J P <ppandit@redhat.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1488 bytes --]

+-- On Mon, 17 Aug 2020, P J P wrote --+
| +-- On Mon, 17 Aug 2020, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote --+
| | On 8/17/20 7:02 AM, P J P wrote:
| | > +-- On Sun, 16 Aug 2020, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote --+
| | > | What about read_with_attrs()/write_with_attrs()? It seems they are part 
| | > | of the same problem.
| | > 
| | > * read/write_with_attrs function is called if read/write callback is not 
| | >   defined
| | > 
| | >   ../softmmu/memory.c
| | >     if (mr->ops->write) {
| | >                     ... memory_region_write_accessor, mr,
| | >     } else {
| | >                     ... memory_region_write_with_attrs_accessor,
| | > 
| | >   So, defining read/write methods may also address read/write_with_attrs 
| | >   issue?
| | > 
| | > * $ grep -Eri -A 5 -B 5 '(\.read_with_attrs|\.write_with_attrs)' . | fpaste
| | > 
| | >    -> https://paste.centos.org/view/386c9597
| | > 
| | >   It doesn't show an occurrence where one of the read/write_with_attrs is 
| | >   missing.
| | > 
| | > * Nevertheless, if we need to define read/write_with_attrs routines, because 
| | >   memory_region_init_io() would assert(3) for them
| | > 
| | >   could that be a subsequent patch series please?
| | 
| | Yes no problem, I was just wondering and wasn't sure.
| 
| @Peter, @Paolo: (To confirm)
|    Do we ping/reach out to respective maintainers for merging this series?


Ping...!
--
Prasad J Pandit / Red Hat Product Security Team
8685 545E B54C 486B C6EB 271E E285 8B5A F050 DE8D