From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MgZrW-0001B3-4z for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 03:57:38 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MgZrR-00018k-Da for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 03:57:37 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=46984 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MgZrR-00018d-5o for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 03:57:33 -0400 Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:18984) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MgZrQ-0002tH-KE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 03:57:32 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MgZrP-0005SF-JA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 03:57:31 -0400 Received: from int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n7R7vTXv026032 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2009 03:57:29 -0400 Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 10:57:28 +0300 From: Gleb Natapov Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] Route IOAPIC interrupts via ISA bus Message-ID: <20090827075728.GJ30093@redhat.com> References: <1249836296-13288-1-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com> <1249836296-13288-3-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com> <4A955CB4.4080205@redhat.com> <4A955D6A.9060804@redhat.com> <4A95633E.7060703@redhat.com> <20090826190944.GD11762@redhat.com> <4A963856.2040301@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A963856.2040301@redhat.com> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gerd Hoffmann Cc: Avi Kivity , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 09:40:06AM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > On 08/26/09 21:09, Gleb Natapov wrote: > >On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 06:30:54PM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > >>Right now we have IRQs 5,10,11 for PCI. Having one more IRQ (so we > >>have one for each link) would be useful IMHO. eight links + eight > >>irqs would be even more useful. What needs to be done for that? > >> > >Current code uses piix3 irq router to route pci interrupts to pic _and_ > >ioapic and piix3 irq router supports only 16 interrupts. > > That means? We could add four more PCI links which have IRQs routed That means changing acpi/bios is unfortunately not enough. > through another IRQ router chip and link them to ioapic lines 17-23 > that way? Something like that. We can invent our own irq router and write driver for it in DSDT. > Or does it mean we must emulate a more recent chipset? > That too will work. -- Gleb.