From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:33522)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>) id 1R3627-0004Gu-Pe
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 08:54:44 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>) id 1R3626-0005k4-8p
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 08:54:43 -0400
Received: from goliath.siemens.de ([192.35.17.28]:20620)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>) id 1R3625-0005ja-Vl
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 08:54:42 -0400
Message-ID: <4E6E010D.9030303@siemens.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 14:54:37 +0200
From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1315824666-4214-1-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com>
	<1315824666-4214-16-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <1315824666-4214-16-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL 15/28] i8259: Convert to MemoryRegion
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>, =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= <andreas.faerber@web.de>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>

On 2011-09-12 12:50, Avi Kivity wrote:
> From: Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
> 
> The only non-obvious part is pic_poll_read which used
> "addr1 >> 7" to detect whether one referred to either
> the master or slave PIC.  Instead, test this directly.

I've an unfinished queue here that, among other things, took some of
the PIC mess away via

--- a/hw/ppc_prep.c
+++ b/hw/ppc_prep.c
@@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ static inline uint32_t _PPC_intack_read(target_phys_addr_t addr)
     uint32_t retval = 0;
 
     if ((addr & 0xf) == 0)
-        retval = pic_intack_read(isa_pic);
+        retval = pic_read_irq(isa_pic);
 #if 0
     printf("%s: 0x" TARGET_FMT_plx " <= %08" PRIx32 "\n", __func__, addr,
            retval);

I've found no regression in prep due to this and was able to kill both
pic_poll_read and pic_intack_read this way.

I've no problem to (later on) rebase my PIC refactorings (properly
decouple both chips and qdev'ify them) on top of this, but maybe the
prep cleanup would already make this patch nicer. Should I break out
that patch?

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux