> Am 11.06.2014 um 02:23 schrieb Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org>: > >> On 10 June 2014 19:09, Alexander Graf <ag...@suse.de> wrote: >> I agree. I see two different paths forward: >> >> 1) Use the patches as they are - they seem pretty sound and take the >> existing x86/s390 only feature to spapr >> 2) Model an "NMI" button. That button would get instantiated by the >> machine model. That would allow the wiring to be defined by the board. >> Monitor / QMP would only "press" that button (trigger an edge interrupt? >> call a function? something). >> >> >> I don't mind much either way - option 2 is the architecturally correct way >> of doing this. Option 1 probably won't hurt us either. > > In an ideal world I'd like (2), ie actually model front panel switches > per machine and with whatever the machine's behaviour actually > is. However pragmatically speaking that's an awful lot of work > (especially since it basically requires adding a lot of U/I which is > always controversial and hard to drive through). I think pragmatism > should probably win here.
Could we just stick a new nmi function callback into the machine class with the nmi command calling it? That gets us on the right track to the right direction without putting too much work on Alexey's shoulders. Converting from there to an actual button object should become reasonably straight forward later. Alex
