Am 28. Mai 2022 09:19:29 UTC schrieb Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayl...@ilande.co.uk>: >Use the new piix4_pm_init() instance init function to initialise 2 separate >qdev >gpios for the SCI and SMI IRQs. > >Signed-off-by: Mark Cave-Ayland <mark.cave-ayl...@ilande.co.uk> >--- > hw/acpi/piix4.c | 9 +++++++++ > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+) > >diff --git a/hw/acpi/piix4.c b/hw/acpi/piix4.c >index d897d2dee6..454fa34df1 100644 >--- a/hw/acpi/piix4.c >+++ b/hw/acpi/piix4.c >@@ -497,6 +497,14 @@ static void piix4_pm_realize(PCIDevice *dev, Error **errp) > piix4_pm_add_properties(s); > } > >+static void piix4_pm_init(Object *obj) >+{ >+ PIIX4PMState *s = PIIX4_PM(obj); >+ >+ qdev_init_gpio_out(DEVICE(obj), &s->irq, 1); >+ qdev_init_gpio_out_named(DEVICE(obj), &s->smi_irq, "smi-irq", 1); >+}
The two IRQs still get connected internally. Doesn't this create the risk of double connections until patches 8 and 9 are applied? >+ > PIIX4PMState *piix4_pm_initfn(PCIBus *bus, int devfn, uint32_t smb_io_base, > qemu_irq sci_irq, qemu_irq smi_irq, > int smm_enabled) >@@ -663,6 +671,7 @@ static void piix4_pm_class_init(ObjectClass *klass, void >*data) > static const TypeInfo piix4_pm_info = { > .name = TYPE_PIIX4_PM, > .parent = TYPE_PCI_DEVICE, >+ .instance_init = piix4_pm_init, > .instance_size = sizeof(PIIX4PMState), > .class_init = piix4_pm_class_init, > .interfaces = (InterfaceInfo[]) {