qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 5/5] i8259: fix dynamically masking slave IRQ


From: Avi Kivity
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 5/5] i8259: fix dynamically masking slave IRQs with IMR register
Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2012 18:52:35 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120717 Thunderbird/14.0

On 09/03/2012 06:42 PM, Juan Quintela wrote:
> Avi Kivity <address@hidden> wrote:
>> On 09/03/2012 11:40 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:
>>> Am 03.09.2012 04:56, schrieb Matthew Ogilvie:
>>>> diff --git a/hw/i8259_common.c b/hw/i8259_common.c
>>>> index ab3d98b..dcde5f2 100644
>>>> --- a/hw/i8259_common.c
>>>> +++ b/hw/i8259_common.c
>>> [...]
>>>> @@ -111,6 +112,7 @@ static const VMStateDescription vmstate_pic_common = {
>>>>          VMSTATE_UINT8(isr, PICCommonState),
>>>>          VMSTATE_UINT8(priority_add, PICCommonState),
>>>>          VMSTATE_UINT8(irq_base, PICCommonState),
>>>> +        VMSTATE_UINT8(icw3, PICCommonState),
>>>>          VMSTATE_UINT8(read_reg_select, PICCommonState),
>>>>          VMSTATE_UINT8(poll, PICCommonState),
>>>>          VMSTATE_UINT8(special_mask, PICCommonState),
>>> 
>>> Additional VMState needs to be versioned by incrementing .version_id and
>>> by specifying the new version number here. Otherwise it breaks migration.
> 
> For the subsection, only sending this when icw3 != 0 is enough?  I am
> searching for a test about when we need to send it.

Looks like the optimal condition is ((s->icw3 & ~s->eclr) != 0) (i.e.
bit set in icw3 but clear in eclr).

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]