From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:42316) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Sp9YS-0005p6-Ey for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 22:55:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Sp9YR-00012C-6R for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 22:55:00 -0400 Message-ID: <1342061686.2229.34.camel@bling.home> From: Alex Williamson Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 20:54:46 -0600 In-Reply-To: <4FFCE423.1020505@ozlabs.ru> References: <1341899497-23265-1-git-send-email-aik@ozlabs.ru> <1341939458.2428.107.camel@bling.home> <4FFCE423.1020505@ozlabs.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] RFC: powerpc-vfio: adding support List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alexey Kardashevskiy Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, Alexander Graf , David Gibson On Wed, 2012-07-11 at 12:25 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > On 11/07/12 02:57, Alex Williamson wrote: > > On Tue, 2012-07-10 at 15:51 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote: > >> The two patches in this set are supposed to add VFIO support for POWER. > >> > >> The first one adds one more step in the initalizaion sequence which I am not > >> sure is correct. > >> > >> The second patch adds actual VFIO support. It is not ready to submit but > >> ready to discuss. I would like to get rid of all #ifdef TARGET_PPC64 in patch #2 > >> and I wonder if there is any plan to implement some generic EOI support code, etc. > > > > A generic EOI notifier is on my todo list, but I have no idea what it's > > going to look like. As you know, I've got an ioapic specific notifier > > in my tree, you add a spapr specific one. I welcome ideas on how to > > create something generic that has a chance of being accepted. Thanks, > > > So far the only platform specific call is xxxx_add_gsi_eoi_notifier. The > xxxx_remove_gsi_eoi_notifier only calls notifier_remove, you've got to fix yours > ioapic_remove_gsi_eoi_notifier() as it does too much :) > > > The only place for placing "add_eoi" callback I can see right now is QEMUMachine as there is no > unified machine interrupt controller - IOAPIC has its own type TYPE_IOAPIC_COMMON and XICS is not > even a SysBusDevice. And the callback is not specific for any kind of bus so it cannot go to PCIBus. > > Does it sound reasonable? I suspect we'd need to somehow tie it into qemu_irq where both handlers and notifiers are allocated so we don't really care the underlying implementation. Something like qemu_add_irq_eoi_notifier(qemu_irq irq, ...). It's another mess like adding the PCIBus interrupt line to gsi effort though. Thanks, Alex