From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=59159 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pca6b-0001ua-AJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Jan 2011 04:01:30 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pca6a-0004yB-1U for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Jan 2011 04:01:29 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:16629) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pca6Z-0004xZ-Qk for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 11 Jan 2011 04:01:27 -0500 Message-ID: <4D2C1C5D.2050504@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2011 11:01:17 +0200 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 26/35] kvm: Eliminate KVMState arguments References: <4D2616D6.4080309@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4D26D6CF.5070405@web.de> <4D27A16F.9030809@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4D282489.90506@web.de> <4D2B6506.6070907@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4D2B6845.7050809@web.de> <4D2B6ADD.4090505@codemonkey.ws> In-Reply-To: <4D2B6ADD.4090505@codemonkey.ws> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Anthony Liguori Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Marcelo Tosatti , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Alexander Graf , Anthony Liguori , Jan Kiszka On 01/10/2011 10:23 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >>> I don't see how ioapic, pit, or pic have a system scope. >> They are not bound to any CPU like the APIC which you may have in mind. > > And none of the above interact with KVM. They're implemented by kvm. What deeper interaction do you have in mind? > > They may be replaced by KVM but if you look at the PIT, this is done > by having two distinct devices. The KVM specific device can (and > should) be instantiated with kvm_state. > > The way the IOAPIC/APIC/PIC is handled in qemu-kvm is nasty. The > kernel devices are separate devices and that should be reflected in > the device tree. I don't see why. Those are just two different implementations for the same guest visible device. It's like saying IDE should be seen differently if it's backed by qcow2 or qed. The device tree is about the guest view of devices. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function