From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MEKe6-0000j0-VS
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 06:03:03 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MEKe3-0000PG-2M
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 06:03:02 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=54017 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MEKe2-0000Ox-QS
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 06:02:58 -0400
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:60290)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1MEKe2-0003XY-3O
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2009 06:02:58 -0400
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:59:28 +0300
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCHv3 07/13] qemu: minimal MSI/MSI-X
	implementation for PC
Message-ID: <20090610095928.GG6844@redhat.com>
References: <cover.1244192535.git.mst@redhat.com>
	<20090605102347.GH26770@redhat.com>
	<20090609173333.GB19375@poweredge.glommer>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20090609173333.GB19375@poweredge.glommer>
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: Glauber Costa <glommer@redhat.com>
Cc: Carsten Otte <cotte@de.ibm.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>

On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 02:33:33PM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
> >      env = cpu_single_env;
> >      if (!env)
> > @@ -727,7 +762,6 @@ static void apic_mem_writel(void *opaque, target_phys_addr_t addr, uint32_t val)
> >      printf("APIC write: %08x = %08x\n", (uint32_t)addr, val);
> >  #endif
> >  
> > -    index = (addr >> 4) & 0xff;
> >      switch(index) {
> >      case 0x02:
> >          s->id = (val >> 24);
> > @@ -911,6 +945,7 @@ int apic_init(CPUState *env)
> >      s->cpu_env = env;
> >  
> >      apic_reset(s);
> > +    msix_supported = 1;
> >  
> >      /* XXX: mapping more APICs at the same memory location */
> >      if (apic_io_memory == 0) {
> > @@ -918,7 +953,8 @@ int apic_init(CPUState *env)
> >             on the global memory bus. */
> >          apic_io_memory = cpu_register_io_memory(0, apic_mem_read,
> >                                                  apic_mem_write, NULL);
> > -        cpu_register_physical_memory(s->apicbase & ~0xfff, 0x1000,
> > +        /* XXX: what if the base changes? */
> > +        cpu_register_physical_memory(MSI_ADDR_BASE, MSI_ADDR_SIZE,
> >                                       apic_io_memory);
> +1 
> 
> I think you have a point here. Your patch is in no way worse than what we had,
> but we're currently not handling correctly the case of base address changing.

Yep.

> Guess it is not common in normal apic usage for OSes...

-- 
MST