On Dec 12, 2011, at 12:40 PM, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 12/12/2011 06:31 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: >> On 11 December 2011 23:01, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@xxxxxx> wrote: >>> Enabling in-kernel irqchips usually means "switching worlds". So the >>> semantics of these particular IRQ inject interface details may change >>> without breaking anything. >>> >>> However, things might look different if there will be a need to inject >>> also the CPU IRQs directly, not only the irqchip inputs. In that case, >>> it may make some sense to reserve more space for interrupt types than >>> just one bit and use a common encoding scheme. >> >> I think with an in-kernel GIC model you'd only need to be able to set >> one of the (256 including internal-to-the-CPU inputs) GIC input lines; >> the GIC itself then connects directly to the vcpu IRQ and FIQ. >> >> So we could just have different semantics for the ioctl in the 'kernel >> GIC model enabled' config, as you suggest. > > btw, since we use the KVM_IRQ_LINE ioctl, it may make sense to require > KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP. To create a kernel GIC model, just call > KVM_CREATE_IRQCHIP with a different parameter. This removes an "except > for ARM" from the documentation. I added this, but it feels a bit contrived. Please take a look when I post the next patch series if this is what you have in mind. Thanks.-- 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
