qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 6/6] xics-kvm: Support for in-kernel XICS interr


From: Alexey Kardashevskiy
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 6/6] xics-kvm: Support for in-kernel XICS interrupt controller
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2013 17:31:32 +1000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7

On 08/07/2013 05:08 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>>> +    icp->nr_irqs = icp->ics->nr_irqs = nr_irqs;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +void xics_kvm_set_nr_servers(XICSState *icp, uint32_t nr_servers)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    int i;
>>>> +
>>>> +    icp->nr_servers = nr_servers;
>>>> +
>>>> +    icp->ss = g_malloc0(icp->nr_servers*sizeof(ICPState));
>>>> +    for (i = 0; i < icp->nr_servers; i++) {
>>>> +        char buffer[32];
>>>> +        object_initialize(&icp->ss[i], TYPE_ICP_KVM);
>>>> +        snprintf(buffer, sizeof(buffer), "icp[%d]", i);
>>>> +        object_property_add_child(OBJECT(icp), buffer, 
>>>> OBJECT(&icp->ss[i]), NULL);
>>>> +    }
>>>> +}
> [...]
>>>> +static void xics_kvm_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    KVMXICSState *icpkvm = KVM_XICS(dev);
>>>> +    XICSState *icp = XICS_COMMON(dev);
>>>> +    int i, rc;
>>>> +    Error *error = NULL;
>>>> +    struct kvm_create_device xics_create_device = {
>>>> +        .type = KVM_DEV_TYPE_XICS,
>>>> +        .flags = 0,
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    assert(kvm_enabled());
>>>> +    assert(kvm_check_extension(kvm_state, KVM_CAP_IRQ_XICS));
>>>
>>> error_setg() - if device can be created without accel=kvm (which it
>>> looks as if it can) then you should just error out the nice way here.
>>
>>
>> I check kvm_enabled() (I thought I check both but was wrong, will fix it)
>> where I try to create XICS_KVM so we should not be here if that check failed.
> 
> -device, -object and patch Anthony's patch QMP are other ways to
> instantiate the same type. :)

Hmm. Nice. I thought "-device xics,nr_irqs=1,nr_servers=2" won't work but
it does (well, fails, but lot further, in realize()) :)



-- 
Alexey



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]