From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KwbpT-0001kJ-Dg
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 02 Nov 2008 07:13:15 -0500
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1KwbpQ-0001jO-S8
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 02 Nov 2008 07:13:14 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=57052 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KwbpQ-0001jL-O1
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 02 Nov 2008 07:13:12 -0500
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([65.74.133.4]:59289)
	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 1KwbpQ-0001rz-Aq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 02 Nov 2008 07:13:12 -0500
From: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [5601] Halt the CPU using a qemu_irq
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2008 13:12:53 +0100
References: <E1KwaXy-0007Ng-Lx@cvs.savannah.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <E1KwaXy-0007Ng-Lx@cvs.savannah.gnu.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200811021213.05223.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: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>

> +static void cpu_halt_signal(void *opaque, int irq, int level)
> +{
> +    if (level && cpu_single_env)
> +        cpu_interrupt(cpu_single_env, CPU_INTERRUPT_HALT);
> +}
>...
> +    cpu_halt = qemu_allocate_irqs(cpu_halt_signal, NULL, 1);

Will this DTRT for SMP, or should we be including cpu_env as an argument to 
cpu_halt_signal? Relying on cpu_single_env being set in an IRQ handler seems 
kinda sketchy.

Paul