From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36187) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1duX1E-0007wJ-Hg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2017 00:53:54 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1duX1B-0001J7-7n for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2017 00:53:52 -0400 Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2017 14:35:33 +1000 From: David Gibson Message-ID: <20170920043533.GF5520@umbus.fritz.box> References: <20170911171235.29331-1-clg@kaod.org> <20170911171235.29331-6-clg@kaod.org> <20170919024544.GK27153@umbus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Wb5NtZlyOqqy58h0" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH v2 05/21] ppc/xive: allocate IRQ numbers for the IPIs List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?C=E9dric?= Le Goater Cc: qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Alexey Kardashevskiy , Alexander Graf --Wb5NtZlyOqqy58h0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 04:52:10PM +0200, C=E9dric Le Goater wrote: > On 09/19/2017 04:45 AM, David Gibson wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 07:12:19PM +0200, C=E9dric Le Goater wrote: > >> The number of IPIs is deduced from the max number of CPUs the guest > >> supports and the IRQ numbers for the IPIs are allocated from the top > >> of the IRQ number space to reduce conflict with other IRQ numbers > >> allocated by the devices. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: C=E9dric Le Goater > >=20 > > This is more ick associated with implementing XIVE in terms of XICS. > > We shouldn't need to "allocate" IRQs for the IPIs - they should just > > be a fixed set. =20 >=20 > They are allocated at the right beginning so we can consider them > fixed I suppose.=20 >=20 > > And we certainly shouldn't need to set the XICS irq type for XIVE irqs. >=20 > This is because, in this patchset, XIVE and XICS use the same IRQ=20 > allocator which happens to be the ICSIRQState array of XICS. yes,=20 > this is ugly but we are identifying the different constraints.=20 Yeah, as I said in the other mail, I think trying to support both immediately is making a mess of the XIVE design. Let's get it working as a machine option first, then worry about CAS and migration. --=20 David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson --Wb5NtZlyOqqy58h0 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEdfRlhq5hpmzETofcbDjKyiDZs5IFAlnB8BUACgkQbDjKyiDZ s5IocxAAhojNUOxxas0HPUQYPCJtMW2TNrG7yov1twZk7VBE9ZR7t9ErAKe1ZH9u YU74gtAvC9d1LMZ1Y5NSHbPC1nYGcqYhnXieUO2ZC7gj8euvTQyqIFCR+ne4Jonk HBnCzYaWKqe8coPJiQskmmXwXo/SvwEAWuqzecJ6sXuoDKdPnqV4AWrjGxmUuhm7 KnFv8acwbTqptbEUls0WjaSvgNILjM/2PHRik7hWbWiYmiPEsAt6e9wFS/u9FGRG ib3SPDKpp0T62g1sD+SQqt1vTjbHp4xrqnwNR/fKyBjfSHTxduQpzndC21jq8MVZ swzHQzaWSiBgq9nyLEQw12NE7XzexZX13VipTzp0uyNi6/iWjY+Ek85M+gWV7lr7 QGM3TG8t9pk4L0CNYZLKgUCEbU0HKv+zCVuBYkLCTdjEzNP0n+vFI82/GykpaJ+s 9BIjVqVC8ZC9Imb5SZIn+h10ftdhQSKQfxrWKat+c+EiBS3cAmy1l+pY/9sYhS2/ jkpCZjvRCThzC14p4mV+wGNNuG9nAB3W6o+1Cu44AajAZ6vRVLr86n8nDSaKKgNw vWQdDzCNbvOBdhAgCrLnRgOVxbQG3+qYbcRckCXX6P2UiSWs6A9bOFNTTLzUo+tq IBtXxj9MnMuXpTuBe61lDqzMwjEn7y/PyooD/qPYw8QUKVlXPxM= =Nx3u -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Wb5NtZlyOqqy58h0--