Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@xxxxxx> writes: > On 2011-05-29 17:26, Avi Kivity wrote: >> On 05/29/2011 06:21 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: [...] >>> We also need a better interface to discover and track legacy IRQ routes >>> for device assignment. Markus is currently collecting requirements for >>> qdev enhancements, and I think generic IRQ manipulation and discovery >>> belongs there. >> >> Possibly. But note that attempting to shoehorn everything into >> bus/device model may not work. Motherboard devices, especially, often >> bypass the bus/device relationship, just because everything is available >> to them on the motherboard, and because hardware designers didn't go to >> software engineering schools but instead do what's necessary to get >> things working. We have to be prepared for exceptions. > > Yes, the IRQ tree should probably be independent of the qdev tree. I was > thinking of qdev as the infrastructure that allows to build and maintain > that tree and to associate IRQ pins with qdev devices. The bus/device model limits the connections between devices to a tree, which can't model real world interrupt wirings. We obviously need to generalize there. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
