Benjamin Herrenschmidt b...@kernel.crashing.org writes:
On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 08:58 -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
There's nothing gross about making the things that are devices
devices.
But there is no such thing as the XICS ...
The XICS is just the combination of ICP's and ICS... so XICS
Benjamin Herrenschmidt b...@kernel.crashing.org writes:
On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 13:40 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
No, why? It is a per CPU state of XICS controller, never exists apart
from XICS.
ICP is. ICS is ... different but can mostly be considered to be the
XICS itself.
On 07/09/2013 11:58 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Benjamin Herrenschmidt b...@kernel.crashing.org writes:
On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 13:40 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
No, why? It is a per CPU state of XICS controller, never exists apart
from XICS.
ICP is. ICS is ... different but can
On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 08:58 -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
There's nothing gross about making the things that are devices
devices.
But there is no such thing as the XICS ...
The XICS is just the combination of ICP's and ICS... so XICS *is* the
device...
Cheers,
Ben.
Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru writes:
On 06/27/2013 09:47 PM, David Gibson wrote:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 04:45:45PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
Currently XICS interrupt controller is not a QEMU device. As we are going
to support in-kernel emulated XICS which is a part of KVM, it
Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru writes:
Currently XICS interrupt controller is not a QEMU device. As we are going
to support in-kernel emulated XICS which is a part of KVM, it make
sense not to extend the existing XICS and have multiple KVM stub functions
but to create yet another device
On 07/09/2013 04:22 AM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
Alexey Kardashevskiy a...@ozlabs.ru writes:
Currently XICS interrupt controller is not a QEMU device. As we are going
to support in-kernel emulated XICS which is a part of KVM, it make
sense not to extend the existing XICS and have multiple KVM
On Tue, 2013-07-09 at 13:40 +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
No, why? It is a per CPU state of XICS controller, never exists apart
from XICS.
ICP is. ICS is ... different but can mostly be considered to be the
XICS itself.
Anthony, we could be completely anal about it and create a gigantic
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:17:19PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
On 06/27/2013 09:47 PM, David Gibson wrote:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 04:45:45PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
Currently XICS interrupt controller is not a QEMU device. As we are going
to support in-kernel emulated
On 02.07.2013, at 02:06, David Gibson wrote:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:17:19PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
On 06/27/2013 09:47 PM, David Gibson wrote:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 04:45:45PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
Currently XICS interrupt controller is not a QEMU device. As we
On 07/02/2013 10:21 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 02.07.2013, at 02:06, David Gibson wrote:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:17:19PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
On 06/27/2013 09:47 PM, David Gibson wrote:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 04:45:45PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
Currently XICS
Currently XICS interrupt controller is not a QEMU device. As we are going
to support in-kernel emulated XICS which is a part of KVM, it make
sense not to extend the existing XICS and have multiple KVM stub functions
but to create yet another device and share pieces between fully emulated
XICS and
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 04:45:45PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
Currently XICS interrupt controller is not a QEMU device. As we are going
to support in-kernel emulated XICS which is a part of KVM, it make
sense not to extend the existing XICS and have multiple KVM stub functions
but to
On 06/27/2013 09:47 PM, David Gibson wrote:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 04:45:45PM +1000, Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
Currently XICS interrupt controller is not a QEMU device. As we are going
to support in-kernel emulated XICS which is a part of KVM, it make
sense not to extend the existing XICS
14 matches
Mail list logo
