Re: [PATCH 1/3] kvm: fix irq 0 assignment

2009-03-04 Thread Sheng Yang
On Thursday 05 March 2009 03:41:41 Chris Wright wrote: > * Marcelo Tosatti (mtosa...@redhat.com) wrote: > > Please do not special case irq 0. The fact that only x86/IA64 are > > supported at the moment does not mean other architectures can't > > use it. > > Seems logical to use a flag instead of ov

Re: [PATCH 1/3] kvm: fix irq 0 assignment

2009-03-04 Thread Chris Wright
* Marcelo Tosatti (mtosa...@redhat.com) wrote: > Please do not special case irq 0. The fact that only x86/IA64 are > supported at the moment does not mean other architectures can't > use it. Seems logical to use a flag instead of overloading the irq value. > Also, the kernel code to handle dev/i

Re: [PATCH 1/3] kvm: fix irq 0 assignment

2009-03-04 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 03:54:27PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote: > Shouldn't update assigned irq if host irq is 0, which means uninitialized > or don't support INTx. > > Signed-off-by: Sheng Yang > --- > qemu/hw/device-assignment.c |4 > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >

Re: [PATCH 1/3] kvm: fix irq 0 assignment

2009-03-04 Thread Chris Wedgwood
On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 03:54:27PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote: > Shouldn't update assigned irq if host irq is 0, which means > uninitialized or don't support INTx. Is that generally true? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.ker

Re: [PATCH 1/3] kvm: fix irq 0 assignment

2009-03-04 Thread Sheng Yang
On Wednesday 04 March 2009 17:58:31 Sheng Yang wrote: > On Wednesday 04 March 2009 17:53:52 Chris Wedgwood wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 03:54:27PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote: > > > Shouldn't update assigned irq if host irq is 0, which means > > > uninitialized or don't support INTx. > > > > Is t

Re: [PATCH 1/3] kvm: fix irq 0 assignment

2009-03-04 Thread Sheng Yang
On Wednesday 04 March 2009 17:53:52 Chris Wedgwood wrote: > On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 03:54:27PM +0800, Sheng Yang wrote: > > Shouldn't update assigned irq if host irq is 0, which means > > uninitialized or don't support INTx. > > Is that generally true? Host irq 0 is reserved for PIT timer, at leas

[PATCH 1/3] kvm: fix irq 0 assignment

2009-03-03 Thread Sheng Yang
Shouldn't update assigned irq if host irq is 0, which means uninitialized or don't support INTx. Signed-off-by: Sheng Yang --- qemu/hw/device-assignment.c |4 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/qemu/hw/device-assignment.c b/qemu/hw/device-assignment.c index 3