From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:40299) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SXY3Z-00070R-41 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 May 2012 09:26:26 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SXY3U-0000cl-BA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 May 2012 09:26:20 -0400 Received: from thoth.sbs.de ([192.35.17.2]:30167) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SXY3U-0000Ym-1C for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 24 May 2012 09:26:16 -0400 Message-ID: <4FBE36E7.9060406@siemens.com> Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 10:25:59 -0300 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4FBE3359.6040407@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4FBE3359.6040407@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH qom-next 4/6] pc: move apic_mapped initialization into common apic init code List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Igor Mammedov Cc: Peter Maydell , "aliguori@us.ibm.com" , "ehabkost@redhat.com" , stefano stabellini , "sw@weilnetz.de" , "mtosatti@redhat.com" , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , "agraf@suse.de" , "blauwirbel@gmail.com" , "avi@redhat.com" , anthony perard , "pbonzini@redhat.com" , "afaerber@suse.de" On 2012-05-24 10:10, Igor Mammedov wrote: > On 05/23/2012 11:26 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: >> On 23 May 2012 22:09, Igor Mammedov wrote: >>> For cpu-hotplug it was suggested to use device_add/del >>> interface for it. To do so in a generalized way hot-plugged cpu >>> should follow general QOM object creation sequence, i.e. >>> - create new cpu instance >>> - set properties >>> - realize instance >>> without creating precedent of special case for cpus in device_add/del >>> if possible. So goal is to have a self-sufficient cpu object that >>> doesn't require external hooks to create/initialize it. It looks >>> possible do so for target-i386 at least. >> >> I think your self-sufficient CPU object should probably be a >> container QOM object which contains the CPU core itself and >> the APIC device. Then the container object's initialisation >> can map the APIC device. > > For x86 it would be artificial thing without a real hardware to > model after, that would needlessly complicate code and interface. > I'd rather avoid this. No, letting the CPU map the APIC is really the proper way to deal with it, specifically once we will support remapping. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux