From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NAAJF-0008Er-5A for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:44:33 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NAAJA-0008CK-Cy for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:44:32 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=47846 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NAAJA-0008CG-2H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:44:28 -0500 Received: from mail-yx0-f188.google.com ([209.85.210.188]:54414) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NAAJ9-0004gW-OU for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:44:27 -0500 Received: by yxe26 with SMTP id 26so5062706yxe.4 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:44:27 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20091116223521.GC12063@shareable.org> References: <20091116223521.GC12063@shareable.org> From: Artyom Tarasenko Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 23:44:07 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] sparc32 irq clearing (guest Solaris performance+NetBSD) fix Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jamie Lokier Cc: Blue Swirl , qemu-devel 2009/11/16 Jamie Lokier : > Artyom Tarasenko wrote: >> I don't know, how the real sun4m reacts in the case where irq stays >> on, not being cleared. >> It can not be though that it would try to process irq for every next >> tick. The CPU must have some time to clear the pending irq, so it must >> be edge triggered too, at least in a way. > > In general, most CPUs have a "disable interrupts" flag which is set at > the same time as calling the irq handler. I see. The handler has enough time to clear pending irq then. Maybe there is really no latch.