[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: |
Isaku Yamahata |
Subject: |
[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] piix_pci: optimize set irq path |
Date: |
Mon, 21 Mar 2011 21:56:56 +0900 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) |
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 02:31:11PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> 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.
Like this?
diff --git a/hw/piix_pci.c b/hw/piix_pci.c
index f07e19d..8052c1e 100644
--- a/hw/piix_pci.c
+++ b/hw/piix_pci.c
@@ -280,8 +280,7 @@ static void piix3_set_irq_pic(PIIX3State *piix3, int
pic_irq)
((PIIX_NUM_PIRQS - 1) << (pic_irq * PIIX_NUM_PIRQS))));
}
-static void piix3_set_irq_level(PIIX3State *piix3, int irq_num, int level,
- bool propagate)
+static void piix3_set_irq_level(PIIX3State *piix3, int irq_num, int level)
{
int pic_irq;
uint64_t mask;
@@ -295,15 +294,13 @@ static void piix3_set_irq_level(PIIX3State *piix3, int
irq_num, int level,
piix3->pic_levels &= ~mask;
piix3->pic_levels |= mask * !!level;
- if (propagate) {
- piix3_set_irq_pic(piix3, pic_irq);
- }
+ piix3_set_irq_pic(piix3, pic_irq);
}
static void piix3_set_irq(void *opaque, int irq_num, int level)
{
PIIX3State *piix3 = opaque;
- piix3_set_irq_level(piix3, irq_num, level, true);
+ piix3_set_irq_level(piix3, irq_num, level);
}
/* irq routing is changed. so rebuild bitmap */
@@ -314,8 +311,7 @@ static void piix3_update_irq_levels(PIIX3State *piix3)
piix3->pic_levels = 0;
for (pirq = 0; pirq < PIIX_NUM_PIRQS; pirq++) {
piix3_set_irq_level(piix3, pirq,
- pci_bus_get_irq_level(piix3->dev.bus, pirq),
- false);
+ pci_bus_get_irq_level(piix3->dev.bus, pirq));
}
}
--
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