Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes for Feb 8

[Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>]

On 02/13/2011 03:24 PM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 13 February 2011 16:56, Anthony Liguori<anthony@codemonkey.ws>  wrote:
>    
>> If we can move away from Bus abstraction and to a simpler interface
>> mechanism, then we can express peer relationships by just having bidirection
>> references.  IOW:
>>
>> -device cpus,northbridge=nb,id=cpus,count=16 -device i440fx,cpus=cpus
>>
>> I don't think modelling each CPU makes sense.  We should probably just model
>> all cpus in a single device for the sake of simplicity.
>>      
> How would this work for systems with multiple CPUs which have different
> views of the world? (ie their memory maps differ so that eg some RAM is
> shared between them but some parts of the address space are different
> RAM for the two cores, some devices one core only, some devices shared
> between cores but the device can tell which core made an IO request)
> With a bus-style abstraction this is straightforward: each core has its
> own bus which is what defines its view of the world, some devices
> and RAM are wired up to both buses. I'm not sure how the bidirectional
> reference model would look for this?
>    

Each core has it's own northbridge.  You would do:

-device arm-cpu,northbridge=nb1  -device dsp,northbridge=nb2

Or whatever.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> (Real world examples would be if we ever had any need to actually
> model any of the auxiliary cores in say an OMAP device, or the
> M3 in a versatile-express. Yes, most systems won't look that odd
> but it does come up, especially in testbench type designs, and our
> interface abstraction should be able to handle it.)
>
> -- PMM
>
>