From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MGtfL-000881-PJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:50:55 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MGtfH-0007z4-Rl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:50:55 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=44869 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MGtfH-0007y3-Eb for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:50:51 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f209.google.com ([209.85.220.209]:64578) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MGtfG-0003kU-Po for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:50:51 -0400 Received: by fxm5 with SMTP id 5so215261fxm.34 for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2009 04:50:49 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090617113918.GZ19508@redhat.com> References: <20090616124702.GS19508@redhat.com> <5b31733c0906170207u1c553f6by67eb814644f55a10@mail.gmail.com> <20090617094318.GX19508@redhat.com> <5b31733c0906170317m67821bc0o74a656e1b7afef21@mail.gmail.com> <20090617110638.GY19508@redhat.com> <4A38D2A4.5070003@redhat.com> <20090617113918.GZ19508@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:50:49 +0200 Message-ID: <5b31733c0906170450o12273437t89aa5d37a4c49b8d@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Register usb-uhci reset function. From: Filip Navara Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016364c749b11d858046c89e73f List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Gleb Natapov Cc: Dor Laor , qemu-devel@nongnu.org --0016364c749b11d858046c89e73f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 02:25:24PM +0300, Dor Laor wrote: > > Some general comments regarding this thread: > > Most pci devices register a reset handler and reset the irq line just > > like this patch. > > I propose to accept this patch first, since it solves a real problem > > (and not a theoretical one). > > > uhci not registering reset handler is clearly a bug and I hope everyone > agrees that this should be fixed. I think the main opposition is against > add qemu_irq() call to the reset handler. And if patch to piix3 is > applied then qemu_irq() in uhci reset handler can be dropped (it > shouldn't IMHO but whatever). The question is why maintainers who now argue > that reset function to piix3 is the beset thing since sliced bread haven't > applied the patch when it was posted? +1 for dropping the set_irq in the reset handler and applying the piix3 patch. I hope we can come to a consensus and finally get the patches in, the bug is real and it's there. I can't speak for the maintainers since I am not one of them. The main reason why I argue for dropping the set_irq is that it's conceptually wrong to call it. It took me a while to read all the mails before I understood that and I am only trying to communicate the knowledge further. I have been hardly bitten by other patches that fixed real problems in a wrong way in the last month or two and I don't want this to happen again if there is already a solution that is "more correct". Best regards, Filip Navara --0016364c749b11d858046c89e73f Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com&= gt; wrote:
On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 02:25:24PM +0300, Dor Laor wrote:=
> Some general comments regarding this thread:
> Most pci devices register a reset handler and reset the irq line just<= br> > like this patch.
> I propose to accept this patch first, since it solves a real problem > (and not a theoretical one).
>
uhci not registering reset handler is clearly a bug and I hope everyo= ne
agrees that this should be fixed. I think the main opposition is against add qemu_irq() call to the reset handler. And if patch to piix3 is
applied then qemu_irq() in uhci reset handler can be dropped (it
shouldn't IMHO but whatever). The question is why maintainers who now a= rgue
that reset function to piix3 is the beset thing since sliced bread haven= 9;t
applied the patch when it was posted?

+1 fo= r=A0dropping the set_irq in the reset handler and applying the piix3 patch.=

I hope we can come to a=A0consensus and finally get the patches in, the bug is r= eal and it's there. I can't speak for the maintainers since I am no= t one of them.

The main reason why I argue for dropping the set_irq is= that it's conceptually wrong to call it. It took me a while to read al= l the mails before I understood that and I am only trying to communicate th= e knowledge further. I have been hardly bitten by other patches that fixed = real problems in a wrong way in the last month or two and I don't want = this to happen again if there is already a solution that is "more corr= ect".

Best regards,
Filip Navara




--0016364c749b11d858046c89e73f--