From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=36110 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OGsrh-0007HS-45
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 May 2010 08:04:13 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <paul@codesourcery.com>) id 1OGsrf-0007fX-Oq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 May 2010 08:04:08 -0400
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com ([38.113.113.100]:43317)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <paul@codesourcery.com>) id 1OGsrf-0007f8-GI
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 25 May 2010 08:04:07 -0400
From: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFT][PATCH 09/15] hpet/rtc: Rework RTC IRQ
	replacement by HPET
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 13:03:43 +0100
References: <cover.1274732025.git.jan.kiszka@web.de>
	<201005251223.14409.paul@codesourcery.com>
	<4BFBB3F3.20902@siemens.com>
In-Reply-To: <4BFBB3F3.20902@siemens.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201005251303.43633.paul@codesourcery.com>
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.nongnu.org/archive/html/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: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Cc: blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>

> > I realise that. However I'd expect things to break if the guest OS
> > devices to share an IRQ line between the HPET and some other device.
> 
> The guest would share IRQ8, not the RTC output. So there would be no
> difference to the current situation.

The difference is that you've removed the check that prevented overlap between 
the PIC and annother device.  You should be using isa_reserve_irq/isa_init_irq 
before you use an ISA IRQ line.  Any uses of isa_bus_irqs (including teh 
existing HPET code) are probably broken.

Paul