[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] piix_pci: optimize set irq path
From: |
Michael S. Tsirkin |
Subject: |
[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] piix_pci: optimize set irq path |
Date: |
Mon, 21 Mar 2011 14:31:11 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 09:10:32PM +0900, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 01:37:07PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > +static int piix3_post_load(void *opaque, int version_id)
> > > +{
> > > + PIIX3State *piix3 = opaque;
> > > + piix3_update_irq_levels(piix3);
> >
> > Couldn't figure out why would we not want to
> > propagate the interrupts here.
> > Could you explain please?
> > What happens if we do propagate them?
> > Nothing bad, right?
>
> I wanted to be just conservative.
> If you are brave enough to change the behavior, I'm fine with propagating
> interrupts.
>
> If we propagate the interrupts, guest OS may see interrupts
> unnecessarily/spuriously injected after load.
> Probably such interrupts doesn't harm OSes, so there is nothing
> bad in theory as you said.
> On the other hand, I hesitated to change the existing behavior because
> it would be very difficult to debug it and to test many OSes.
I expect it won't change the behaviour because the interrupts
are level: at the moment e.g. pci devices already reassert
interrupts on load.
But I agree it better be a separate patch, and needs a lot of testing.
> --
> yamahata
[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] piix_pci: optimize set irq path, Michael S. Tsirkin, 2011/03/21
[Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 1/3] pci: add accessor function to get irq levels, Isaku Yamahata, 2011/03/19