On Tuesday 26 March 2013, Peter Maydell wrote: > > On 26 March 2013 10:54, Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> wrote: > > Yes, very good. We will probably introduce sparse irq support on > > versatile in the near future, and then the value we write into the > > PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE field will become arbitrary from qemu's point > > of view, but I will make sure that we fix the interrupt mapping > > in the kernel at the same time so we always fall into the > > "s->broken_irq_mapping = false;" case. > > Yeah, as long as you avoid the number 27 you're ok :-)
Good point. I guess we'll have to keep using a legacy domain for versatile then. > > We also need to find a way to make the new kernel work with > > an old qemu, and I think we can do that by using the versatile-dt > > board type with a PCI device node that sets all four lines to > > 27, while using the actual interrupt lines for the default > > versatile device tree. > > Personally I'd be happy for you to just say "needs a new QEMU". > The broken QEMU is missing so much (including working memory > windows) that I think it would be a pain to get the kernel to > cope with it. But it was working earlier, so I'd definitely try not to break if at all possible. A lot of people use the verstatile qemu model to run kernels and I would not want to deal with the complaints I'd get if we break those. Using a separate dts file seems easy enough. Arnd