From: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
To: Pavel Fedin <p.fedin@samsung.com>
Cc: Shlomo Pongratz <shlomo.pongratz@huawei.com>,
Shlomo Pongratz <shlomopongratz@gmail.com>,
QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] PING: [PATCH v2 0/2] cpu_arm: Implement irqchip property for ARM CPU
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 16:01:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFEAcA-2X3oJK6RywzRKzWf78S9GKVdS7BTCRui8vG3MLAaA+Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <021b01d0e720$976283d0$c6278b70$@samsung.com>
On 4 September 2015 at 15:47, Pavel Fedin <p.fedin@samsung.com> wrote:
> Hello!
>
>> It's not clear to me that the TCG version of GICv3
>> emulation should need to have such a link.
>
> How can it be done otherwise? Should GIC code somehow register
> own system register handlers instead?
Well, this comes down to how we want to design the part of the
GICv3 that deals with the CPU interface. In hardware this is
a clearly separated boundary with a defined protocol between the
"GIC proper" and the "CPU interface", which might well be
implementations from different companies. We could implement
it like that; or we could decide to merge the two into what
we call a single GIC device, where that GIC device registers
a set of system registers in each CPU.
I'm not sure what the right answer is; it depends a bit
on how the kernel ends up deciding to export the GIC
state which is in the CPU interface. Having a fused
single GIC device makes it easier to slot in gicv2 vs
gicv3 in our board models, though modelling it like
hardware would be cleaner in some ways.
>> The original
>> emulation patchset was definitely not handling the
>> GIC-to-CPU connection in the right way
>
> But it seems to be very convenient to reuse what already exists,
> isn't it?
What already exists in QEMU is often legacy and not necessarily
a very good model for anything.
> Well, if you just don't want, then you don't want, i'm fine with
> this.
This series might be the right approach (I think if we do want
a property the CPU owns which points at the interrupt controller
it's good code to do that). But it needs to be part of
the patchset which adds the GICv3 emulation support that
requires it, so that we can review the whole design and
see if it makes sense as a whole.
thanks
-- PMM
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-04 15:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-04 6:49 [Qemu-devel] PING: [PATCH v2 0/2] cpu_arm: Implement irqchip property for ARM CPU Pavel Fedin
2015-09-04 14:11 ` Peter Maydell
2015-09-04 14:47 ` Pavel Fedin
2015-09-04 15:01 ` Peter Maydell [this message]
2015-09-07 14:12 ` Shlomo Pongratz
2015-09-09 7:07 ` Pavel Fedin
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=CAFEAcA-2X3oJK6RywzRKzWf78S9GKVdS7BTCRui8vG3MLAaA+Q@mail.gmail.com \
--to=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=p.fedin@samsung.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=shlomo.pongratz@huawei.com \
--cc=shlomopongratz@gmail.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).