[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] Should the i8259 devices remain no-user?
From: |
Paolo Bonzini |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] Should the i8259 devices remain no-user? |
Date: |
Wed, 16 Oct 2013 18:23:11 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130923 Thunderbird/17.0.9 |
Il 16/10/2013 18:21, BALATON Zoltan ha scritto:
> On Wed, 16 Oct 2013, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Il 16/10/2013 11:51, Markus Armbruster ha scritto:
>>> Let me try to elaborate, to make sure I understand.
>>>
>>> Unlike ordinary ISA devices, the i8259 devices need additional wiring,
>>> done by code.
>>>
>>> For instance, board code like pc_q35_init(), pc_piix.c's pc_init1(),
>>> mips_malta_init(), ... wire up their IRQ input lines. The slave's IRQ
>>> output line is wired to the master's IRQ2 in hw/intc/i8259.c for
>>> isa-i8259, and the kernel for kvm-i8259. The master's IRQ output line
>>> is wired up by board code (it's complicated).
>>>
>>> Correct? If yes, I can turn it into a suitable comment.
>>
>> The wiring of the slave to the master is hardcoded into i8259 code.
>
> A bit off topic but this reminded me of these patches:
>
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/206753/
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/208252/
>
> which never got merged. Is there a chance that these fixes get merged
> sometimes or is there an explanation why it won't be fixed? As far as I
> remember the patches were reviewed and multiple versions were proposed
> but at the end no decision was reached on which one to merge and it was
> just left uncorrected.
Right, thank you very much. ISTR the unanswered question was what to do
about migration, but I need to reread all the threads.
Paolo
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 9/9] qdev: Do not let the user try to device_add when it cannot work, (continued)
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 9/9] qdev: Do not let the user try to device_add when it cannot work, armbru, 2013/10/10
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 3/9] apic: Document why cannot_instantiate_with_device_add_yet, armbru, 2013/10/10
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 1/9] qdev: Replace no_user by cannot_instantiate_with_device_add_yet, armbru, 2013/10/10
- [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 8/9] isa: Clean up use of cannot_instantiate_with_device_add_yet, armbru, 2013/10/10
- [Qemu-devel] Should the i8259 devices remain no-user? (was: [PATCH RFC 8/9] isa: Clean up use of cannot_instantiate_with_device_add_yet), Markus Armbruster, 2013/10/15
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Should the i8259 devices remain no-user?, Paolo Bonzini, 2013/10/15
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Should the i8259 devices remain no-user?, Markus Armbruster, 2013/10/16
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Should the i8259 devices remain no-user?, Paolo Bonzini, 2013/10/16
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Should the i8259 devices remain no-user?, Markus Armbruster, 2013/10/16
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Should the i8259 devices remain no-user?, BALATON Zoltan, 2013/10/16
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Should the i8259 devices remain no-user?,
Paolo Bonzini <=
- Re: [Qemu-devel] fix clearing i8259 IRQ lines (Was: Should the i8259 devices remain no-user?), Matthew Ogilvie, 2013/10/26
- Re: [Qemu-devel] fix clearing i8259 IRQ lines (Was: Should the i8259 devices remain no-user?), BALATON Zoltan, 2013/10/29
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 5/9] ich9: Document why cannot_instantiate_with_device_add_yet, armbru, 2013/10/10
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 6/9] piix3 piix4: Document why cannot_instantiate_with_device_add_yet, armbru, 2013/10/10
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 7/9] vt82c686: Document why cannot_instantiate_with_device_add_yet, armbru, 2013/10/10
[Qemu-devel] Why is TYPE_CPU no-user? (was: [PATCH RFC 0/9] Clean up and fix no_user), Markus Armbruster, 2013/10/15