From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1HaxFh-0007Aw-Af
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2007 13:02:01 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1HaxFg-0007AY-0y
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2007 13:02:01 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HaxFf-0007AV-Pr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2007 13:01:59 -0400
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([65.74.133.4])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps
	(TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <paul@codesourcery.com>) id 1HaxBp-0005qC-4K
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2007 12:58:01 -0400
From: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: IRQ handling
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2007 17:57:52 +0100
References: <E1HaFQv-0001jN-Uh@cvs> <200704091458.50964.paul@codesourcery.com>
	<1176130565.1516.313.camel@rapid>
In-Reply-To: <1176130565.1516.313.camel@rapid>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200704091757.53211.paul@codesourcery.com>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Cc: "J. Mayer" <l_indien@magic.fr>

> > In its current implementation it doesn't provide any functional
> > enhancements over a {callpack, opaque, nIRQ} triplet. What it does do is
> > isolate the device (IRQ source) emulation from the implementation
> > details.
>
> So, I was confused by some remarks saying that this would give new
> features.

I probably meant functionality improvements to the devices that didn't 
previously implement the full triplet. Sorry for any confusion.

> Yes, the implementation is incomplete. I need to use more than one
> outputs for embedded PowerPC emulation but the code is not finished.
> I just started to rework all this code. If I want to follow your new
> scheme, I have to add an emulation for the implementation dependant
> hardware internal IRQ controller (fortunately, most usual PowerPC
> implementations use the same scheme) and try to change the OpenPIC so it
> can easily map its outputs pins to the input pins of the PowerPC, in a
> machine dependant way.

That is what I would recommend doing.

Paul