From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33863)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <p.fedin@samsung.com>) id 1ZouaT-0005mm-6f
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 10:41:57 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <p.fedin@samsung.com>) id 1ZouaP-0002mD-5r
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 10:41:57 -0400
Received: from mailout3.w1.samsung.com ([210.118.77.13]:60035)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <p.fedin@samsung.com>) id 1ZouaO-0002m8-Vs
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 10:41:53 -0400
Received: from eucpsbgm1.samsung.com (unknown [203.254.199.244])
	by mailout3.w1.samsung.com
	(Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.31.0 64bit (built May 5
	2014)) with ESMTP id <0NWK00ANFRHQGB60@mailout3.w1.samsung.com> for
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 15:41:50 +0100 (BST)
From: Pavel Fedin <p.fedin@samsung.com>
References: <1445361732-16257-1-git-send-email-shlomopongratz@gmail.com>
	<1445361732-16257-7-git-send-email-shlomopongratz@gmail.com>
	<014301d10bfe$20c00970$62401c50$@samsung.com>
	<CAHzK-V0zNYeYDYn6thGW08JJDVf7AQphxUtL6ud9i04TG1iLLQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<015801d10c02$1c60d130$55227390$@samsung.com>
	<CAHzK-V2WagbPU-kB0r=g1a0Gb0B+4x1Q44+daWzaYBOF4i2kmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<016c01d10c07$3b156fa0$b1404ee0$@samsung.com>
	<CAHzK-V2=Wm_WyrKu+YegEzRcDfGjLQnnembYp3fK83iESjA3nA@mail.gmail.com>
	<019c01d10c0c$83292e30$897b8a90$@samsung.com>
	<CAHzK-V04Sb_N57BzJkQW5dRnF4CS+ocjWz9ja+pxPvLmVyB7gw@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to: <CAHzK-V04Sb_N57BzJkQW5dRnF4CS+ocjWz9ja+pxPvLmVyB7gw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 17:41:49 +0300
Message-id: <01ba01d10c0e$9ebbfa90$dc33efb0$@samsung.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Content-language: ru
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC V5 6/9] hw/intc: arm_gicv3_spi_its
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: 'Shlomo Pongratz' <shlomopongratz@gmail.com>
Cc: peter.maydell@linaro.org, eric.auger@linaro.org, 'Shlomo Pongratz' <shlomo.pongratz@huawei.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, shannon.zhao@linaro.org, ashoks@broadcom.com, imammedo@redhat.com

 Hello!

> I just wanted to understand. I don't have any preferences.

 In other words, in short: spec says that ITS is optional, so we can =
implement it as a separate component, which gets attached to the GIC =
using some specified interface. It's not a problem to design such an =
interface. Actually, i believe real HW does the same thing.
 In my RFC i have implemented a part of this interface. My ITS class has =
gic-parent property, which is used to attach it to the GIC. KVM =
implementation fetches vGIC's fd from there, while software emulation =
can use it to call LPI methods on the GIC. The property is declared as =
implementation-specific only because it would have different object =
type, for additional fail-safety. Software-emulated ITS cannot be =
attached to KVM vGIC and vice versa, actually only because kernel guys =
don't want direct LPI injection.

Kind regards,
Pavel Fedin
Expert Engineer
Samsung Electronics Research center Russia