From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:41290) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Su4Bp-0006di-0F for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 12:12:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Su4Be-0005cq-7q for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 12:11:56 -0400 Received: from david.siemens.de ([192.35.17.14]:29834) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Su4Bd-0005cX-Tg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 12:11:46 -0400 Message-ID: <50101ABE.4080801@siemens.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 18:11:42 +0200 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1343222672-25312-1-git-send-email-peter.maydell@linaro.org> <1343222672-25312-3-git-send-email-peter.maydell@linaro.org> <50101519.4020108@redhat.com> <5010166A.5070201@siemens.com> <501016D9.2050101@redhat.com> <501017B8.8040507@siemens.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/6] kvm: Rename kvm_irqchip_set_irq to kvm_inject_async_irq List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , Alexander Graf , "patches@linaro.org" , Avi Kivity , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" On 2012-07-25 18:09, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 25 July 2012 16:58, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> On 2012-07-25 17:56, Peter Maydell wrote: >>> On 25 July 2012 16:55, Avi Kivity wrote: >>>> On 07/25/2012 06:53 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>>> We don't have a synchronous function anymore, it's part of the pre-run >>>>> code of x86 IIRC. >>>> >>>> Right. There's a DPRINTF() there that talks about injection, too. So I >>>> think this patch can be dropped. >>> >>> The main purpose of the patch is to remove 'irqchip' from the >>> function name, because the function isn't restricted to use >>> with in-kernel irqchips. >> >> Hmm, what was question again? Ah: Do we have an arch that implements it >> without providing a (logical) irqchip? At least at this time (including >> ARM)? > > Well, it depends what you mean by 'irqchip' (part of the point of > this series being that there isn't a coherent architecture > independent definition of that and so we shouldn't use the term > in architecture-independent code). > On ARM we will use KVM_IRQ_LINE whether we have an in-kernel VGIC > or not, because we always use async interrupt injection. > > (That is, the same arguments for "why should this function be > guarded by kvm_async_interrupt_injection() rather than > kvm_irqchip_in_kernel()?" apply to "why should this function not > have 'irqchip' in the function name.) Wasn't Avi's point that you do have an irqchip in your KVM support? Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SDP-DE Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux