From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:33079) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TikeQ-0007Jt-E3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 06:40:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Tike8-0002sR-E8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 06:38:58 -0500 Received: from thoth.sbs.de ([192.35.17.2]:23016) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Tike8-0002r6-2s for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 06:38:40 -0500 Message-ID: <50C86CB9.9020603@siemens.com> Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 12:38:33 +0100 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1353880306-8004-1-git-send-email-mmogilvi_qemu@miniinfo.net> <20121211161955.GG29003@redhat.com> <20121212074641.GB3582@comcast.net> <20121212113636.GN11016@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20121212113636.GN11016@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v7 00/10] i8254, i8259 and running Microport UNIX (ca 1987) List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gleb Natapov Cc: Matthew Ogilvie , "Maciej W. Rozycki" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 2012-12-12 12:36, Gleb Natapov wrote: >> How about things like pit_get_out(), >> pit_get_next_transition_time(), etc in qemu/hw/i8254_common.c? (If >> not used when KVM is enabled, then why are they "common"?) What >> are the implications if qemu and KVM implementations of such >> functions disagree? >> > They are common because they work on device state that can comes from > either QEMU device emulation or kvm device emulation. Why QEMU even touches > KVM's device state other than for migration I do not know. Jan? PC speaker emulation. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SDP-DE Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux