From: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>,
Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>,
Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option
Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 20:16:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikiej62YsJE_6tw1Kmgkd3PXXW-48JZZRTLzDqa@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4BFABF77.8050108@codemonkey.ws>
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws> wrote:
> On 05/24/2010 12:54 PM, Juan Quintela wrote:
>>
>> Paul Brook<paul@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> On 05/24/2010 11:32 AM, Paul Brook wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Notice that this patch was sent against hpet as one example, if we
>>>>>> agree
>>>>>> that this "way" of disabling devices is ok, we could disable more
>>>>>> devices/have more flexibility. Notice that in general, we (RHEL/KVM)
>>>>>> are interested in a small subset of qemu devices.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> IMO this patch is a backwards step. The device models should be
>>>>> cleaned
>>>>> up so that you don't need to make a compile time decision.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I disagree. I think the device model should be cleaned up so that no
>>>> CONFIG_HPET is required in code but I think it's still useful to be able
>>>> to exclude device models from the build. That should just be a matter
>>>> of not building the object though (that's the point of device_init()).
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think we're saying the same thing.
>>>
>>> We already have a mechanism for avoiding things at build time -
>>> specifically
>>> config-devices.mak. We don't have a nice UI for it, but it's there.
>>> At worst your distro specific patch is a 1-line change to default-
>>> configs/i386-softmmu.mak.
>>>
>>> I have no objection to moving hpet.c into Makefile.objs, conditional on
>>> CONFIG_HPET (like e.g. CONFIG_SERIAL/serial.o). However a necessary
>>> prerequisite is that you fix the device model and machine initialisation
>>> so
>>> that it's possible to omit hpet.o without rebuilding anything else.
>>>
>>
>> We have two exported functions:
>>
>> void hpet_init(qemu_irq *irq);
>> uint32_t hpet_in_legacy_mode(void);
>>
>> This is how one is used in mc14818rtc:
>>
>> #if defined TARGET_I386
>> if (!hpet_in_legacy_mode())
>> #endif
>>
>
> In real hardware, and HPET would normally emulate an RTC. The interaction
> problem here is that we aren't modelling that correctly in qemu as we're
> treating the rtc as a separate device.
>
> What could probably work at a hand wave level, is to make the rtc init
> function take a qemu_irq instead of directly grabbing the isa irq. When an
> HPET is in use, the rtc no longer is directly initiated but instead is
> indirectly initiated by the HPET passing a special qemu_irq to the device
> that masks the actual interrupt line when legacy mode isn't enabled. When
> the HPET isn't in use, the rtc would be created with an isa allocated
> qemu_irq.
Fully agree, HPET logic should be moved into HPET. I think my
yesterday's patches only went half way.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-05-24 20:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-05-24 15:18 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option Juan Quintela
2010-05-24 15:18 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/6] Create again config-device.h and config.devices.h Juan Quintela
2010-05-24 15:18 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/6] Move no_hpet declaration to hpet_emul.h Juan Quintela
2010-05-24 15:18 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/6] Move no_hpet test to inside hpet_init() Juan Quintela
2010-05-24 15:18 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 4/6] Make hpet_in_legacy_mode() return 0 for !TARGET_I386 Juan Quintela
2010-05-24 15:18 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 5/6] make hpet_in_legacy_mode() return a bool Juan Quintela
2010-05-24 15:18 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 6/6] Create CONFIG_HPET Juan Quintela
2010-05-24 15:20 ` [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/6] Make hpet a compile time option Juan Quintela
2010-05-24 15:43 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-05-24 15:57 ` Juan Quintela
2010-05-24 16:20 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-05-24 18:08 ` Juan Quintela
2010-05-24 20:11 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-05-24 16:32 ` Paul Brook
2010-05-24 16:49 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-05-24 17:11 ` Paul Brook
2010-05-24 17:37 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-05-24 17:54 ` Juan Quintela
2010-05-24 18:03 ` Anthony Liguori
2010-05-24 18:15 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-05-24 20:16 ` Blue Swirl [this message]
2010-05-24 18:10 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-05-25 8:38 ` Paolo Bonzini
2010-05-25 9:05 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-05-25 9:56 ` Paolo Bonzini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=AANLkTikiej62YsJE_6tw1Kmgkd3PXXW-48JZZRTLzDqa@mail.gmail.com \
--to=blauwirbel@gmail.com \
--cc=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
--cc=jan.kiszka@web.de \
--cc=paul@codesourcery.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=quintela@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).