Re: [PATCH-for-5.0? 3/3] hw/openrisc/pic_cpu: Use qdev gpio rather than qemu_allocate_irqs()

[Stafford Horne]

On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 11:29:43PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> Switch to using the qdev gpio API which is preferred over
> qemu_allocate_irqs(). Doing so we also stop leaking the
> allocated memory. One step to eventually deprecate and
> remove qemu_allocate_irqs() one day.
> 
> Patch created mechanically using spatch with this script
> inspired from commit d6ef883d9d7:
> 
>   @@
>   typedef qemu_irq;
>   identifier irqs, handler;
>   expression opaque, count, i;
>   @@
>   -   qemu_irq *irqs;
>       ...
>   -   irqs = qemu_allocate_irqs(handler, opaque, count);
>   +   qdev_init_gpio_in(DEVICE(opaque), handler, count);
>       <+...
>   -   irqs[i]
>   +   qdev_get_gpio_in(DEVICE(opaque), i)
>       ...+>
>   ?-  g_free(irqs);
> 
> Inspired-by: Peter Maydell <address@hidden>
> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <address@hidden>
> ---
>  hw/openrisc/pic_cpu.c | 5 ++---
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/hw/openrisc/pic_cpu.c b/hw/openrisc/pic_cpu.c
> index 36f9350830..4b0c92f842 100644
> --- a/hw/openrisc/pic_cpu.c
> +++ b/hw/openrisc/pic_cpu.c
> @@ -52,10 +52,9 @@ static void openrisc_pic_cpu_handler(void *opaque, int 
> irq, int level)
>  void cpu_openrisc_pic_init(OpenRISCCPU *cpu)
>  {
>      int i;
> -    qemu_irq *qi;
> -    qi = qemu_allocate_irqs(openrisc_pic_cpu_handler, cpu, NR_IRQS);
> +    qdev_init_gpio_in(DEVICE(cpu), openrisc_pic_cpu_handler, NR_IRQS);
>  
>      for (i = 0; i < NR_IRQS; i++) {
> -        cpu->env.irq[i] = qi[i];
> +        cpu->env.irq[i] = qdev_get_gpio_in(DEVICE(cpu), i);
>      }
>  }

This looks fine to me.

Why do you have the '5.0?' in the subject?

-Stafford