From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:60167)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1UHsoz-0006FZ-O8
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 Mar 2013 05:27:07 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1UHsoy-0008Dx-A9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 Mar 2013 05:27:05 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:27783)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1UHsox-0008Dm-Vi
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 19 Mar 2013 05:27:04 -0400
Message-ID: <51482F56.4070604@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 10:26:46 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1363628125-5310-1-git-send-email-pbonzini@redhat.com>
	<CAFEAcA8yVrVSBLer45F_2kwmxHeKEBnO3ux9foU80YgAWd3f9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5147572E.8040501@redhat.com>
	<CAFEAcA9PYeXnpr1Lykurgr64A1EL+zNod7us-2RZYCOBTxjGYg@mail.gmail.com>
	<51475A00.8070304@redhat.com>
	<CAFEAcA_Uo8Puzx3DcyjeZzqpnXV9PU1Qn3_E4REOou6pTiJaEw@mail.gmail.com>
	<5147738F.7070803@redhat.com>
	<CAFEAcA8vo9ZjeT3bWH8xj7xzMPbWj=1-7yBVNiSenqwdfS919A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA8vo9ZjeT3bWH8xj7xzMPbWj=1-7yBVNiSenqwdfS919A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 00/35] hw/ reorganization, part 2
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: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: "Edgar E. Iglesias" <edgar.iglesias@gmail.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= <afaerber@suse.de>, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>

Il 18/03/2013 21:21, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
> On 18 March 2013 20:05, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Il 18/03/2013 19:17, Peter Maydell ha scritto:
>>>>> Shouldn't these containers also host the CPU device(s), rather than the
>>>>> boards?  And create them according to the num-cpu property?  If so, they
>>>>> would have to go in hw/arm.
>>> Yes, ideally they should have the CPU devices in them too.
>>> Remind me why devices which instantiate the CPU device go
>>> in hw/arm ?
>>
>> Because they refer to ARMCPU/CPUARMState.
> 
> Well, a container object that instantiated the CPUs wouldn't
> be referring to the internal CPU state struct, it would just
> be treating them as QOM objects like any other, so that doesn't
> apply.

Wouldn't it also bridge the CPU's internal interrupt pins to the GIC?
Like this code in highbank.c:


        /* This will become a QOM property eventually */
        irqp = arm_pic_init_cpu(cpu);
        cpu_irq[n] = irqp[ARM_PIC_CPU_IRQ];
...
    for (n = 0; n < smp_cpus; n++) {
        sysbus_connect_irq(busdev, n, cpu_irq[n]);
    }

Paolo