From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC546C49ED9 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:31:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 81D7E20830 for ; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:31:23 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 81D7E20830 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:59794 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1i8LRh-00082N-Pr for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 05:31:21 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44347) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1i8LO7-0004FU-16 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 05:27:40 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1i8LO5-0004dO-MZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 05:27:38 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:41388) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1i8LO0-0004ZL-Py; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 05:27:32 -0400 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A9F430860BD; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:27:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.116.238] (ovpn-116-238.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.238]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5576F60C05; Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:27:29 +0000 (UTC) To: Peter Maydell References: <20190911155125.11932-1-eric.auger@redhat.com> <20190911155125.11932-4-eric.auger@redhat.com> <1b849672-31a6-3d8d-b8ea-254e737e3b80@redhat.com> From: Auger Eric Message-ID: <7eb28173-122f-454e-ccba-bd444d7b6376@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2019 11:27:27 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.12 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.44]); Thu, 12 Sep 2019 09:27:31 +0000 (UTC) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC v2 3/3] virt: Check KVM_CAP_ARM_IRQ_LINE_LAYOUT_2 for smp_cpus > 256 X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Zenghui Yu , Marc Zyngier , qemu-arm , QEMU Developers , Eric Auger Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" Hi Peter, On 9/12/19 11:00 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: > On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 at 09:57, Auger Eric wrote: >> >> Hi Peter, >> On 9/12/19 10:42 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: > >>> Is there really no place to put this check in common code? > >> Not sure what you mean by common code here? Do you mean in a common code >> for ARM machines (I don't think we have any atm) or directly in >> kvm_init(). I did not want to pollute this latter with this ARM specific >> fix. > > I'd just rather we didn't have to have the same "if ..." check > in every arm board that supports KVM. > > If kvm_init() happens at a point where we have enough info to > make the check, then you can put the check in kvm_arch_init(), > which is the architecture-specific hook that kvm_init() calls. OK Thank you for the hint. It should be OK. Thanks! Eric > > thanks > -- PMM >