From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39727)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <balaton@eik.bme.hu>) id 1VWTxP-00017p-V0
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 12:28:28 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <balaton@eik.bme.hu>) id 1VWTxL-000478-2c
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 12:28:23 -0400
Received: from mono.eik.bme.hu ([152.66.115.2]:36927)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <balaton@eik.bme.hu>) id 1VWTxK-0003zl-Rk
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 12:28:18 -0400
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 18:21:26 +0200 (CEST)
From: BALATON Zoltan <balaton@eik.bme.hu>
In-Reply-To: <525E7347.2050202@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.GSO.2.01.1310161813040.2141@mono>
References: <1381416174-5110-1-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
	<1381416174-5110-9-git-send-email-armbru@redhat.com>
	<87wqlehfg9.fsf_-_@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<525D3B0E.9040304@redhat.com>
	<87wqldsfuu.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<525E7347.2050202@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Should the i8259 devices remain no-user?
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: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, Anthony Liguori <aliguori@amazon.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Wed, 16 Oct 2013, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 16/10/2013 11:51, Markus Armbruster ha scritto:
>> Let me try to elaborate, to make sure I understand.
>>
>> Unlike ordinary ISA devices, the i8259 devices need additional wiring,
>> done by code.
>>
>> For instance, board code like pc_q35_init(), pc_piix.c's pc_init1(),
>> mips_malta_init(), ... wire up their IRQ input lines.  The slave's IRQ
>> output line is wired to the master's IRQ2 in hw/intc/i8259.c for
>> isa-i8259, and the kernel for kvm-i8259.  The master's IRQ output line
>> is wired up by board code (it's complicated).
>>
>> Correct?  If yes, I can turn it into a suitable comment.
>
> The wiring of the slave to the master is hardcoded into i8259 code.

A bit off topic but this reminded me of these patches:

http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/206753/
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/208252/

which never got merged. Is there a chance that these fixes get merged 
sometimes or is there an explanation why it won't be fixed? As far as I 
remember the patches were reviewed and multiple versions were proposed but 
at the end no decision was reached on which one to merge and it was just 
left uncorrected.

Thanks,
BALATON Zoltan