qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@aj.id.au>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: qemu-arm@nongnu.org, joel@jms.id.au, clg@kaod.org, f4bug@amsat.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 1/1] memory: Support unaligned accesses on aligned-only models
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2017 14:05:33 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <cd1aba90-176f-9ec6-3e2b-d1135156a96d@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170630030058.28943-1-andrew@aj.id.au>

On 30/06/2017 05:00, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> This RFC patch stems from a discussion on a patch for an ADC model[1] where it
> was pointed out that I should be able to use the .impl member of
> MemoryRegionOps to constrain how my read() and write() callbacks where invoked.
> 
> I tried Phil's suggested approach and found I got reads of size 4, but with an
> address that was not 4-byte aligned.
> 
> Looking at the source for access_with_adjusted_size() lead to the comment
> 
>      /* FIXME: support unaligned access? */
> 
> which at least suggests that the implementation isn't complete.
> 
> So, this patch is a quick and incomplete attempt at resolving the issue to see
> whether I'm on the right track or way off in the weeds.
> 
> I've lightly tested it with the ADC model mentioned above, and it appears to do
> the right thing (I changed the values generated by the ADC to distinguish
> between the lower and upper 16 bits).

I think the idea is okay.

> +    access_addr[0] = align_down(addr, access_size);
> +    access_addr[1] = align_up(addr + size, access_size);
> +
> +        for (cur = access_addr[0]; cur < access_addr[1]; cur += access_size) {
> +            uint64_t mask_bounds[2];
> +            mask_bounds[0] = MAX(addr, cur) - cur;
> +            mask_bounds[1] =
> +                MIN(addr + size, align_up(cur + 1, access_size)) - cur;
> +
> +            access_mask = (-1ULL << mask_bounds[0] * 8) &
> +                (-1ULL >> (64 - mask_bounds[1] * 8));

Please use MAKE_64BIT_MASK.

> +            r |= access(mr, cur, &access_value, access_size,
> +                  (MAX(addr, cur) - addr), access_mask, attrs);
> +
> +            /* XXX: Can't do this hack for writes */
> +            access_value >>= mask_bounds[0] * 8;
> +        }

Can you subtract access_addr[0] from mask_bounds[0] and mask_bounds[1]
(instead of cur) to remove the need for this right shift?

Thanks,

Paolo

  reply	other threads:[~2017-07-13 12:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-06-30  3:00 [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH 1/1] memory: Support unaligned accesses on aligned-only models Andrew Jeffery
2017-07-13 12:05 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2017-07-14  6:20   ` Andrew Jeffery

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=cd1aba90-176f-9ec6-3e2b-d1135156a96d@redhat.com \
    --to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=andrew@aj.id.au \
    --cc=clg@kaod.org \
    --cc=f4bug@amsat.org \
    --cc=joel@jms.id.au \
    --cc=qemu-arm@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).