On 31/10/2018 15:30, Michael Walle wrote:
>>
>> Just one thing, I think an atomic test-and-clear is a better API. I
>> understand that what you have works, because
>> get_irq_latched+clear_irq_latch don't have any intervening access to the
>> qtest socket.
>
> Ok thanks, like get_and_clear_irq_la
Am 2018-10-31 11:19, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
On 18/07/2018 12:48, Michael Walle wrote:
/**
+ * get_irq_latched:
+ * @num: Interrupt to observe.
+ *
+ * Returns: The latched level of the @num interrupt.
+ */
+static inline bool get_irq_latched(int num)
+{
+return qtest_get_irq_latched(global_
On 18/07/2018 12:48, Michael Walle wrote:
> /**
> + * get_irq_latched:
> + * @num: Interrupt to observe.
> + *
> + * Returns: The latched level of the @num interrupt.
> + */
> +static inline bool get_irq_latched(int num)
> +{
> +return qtest_get_irq_latched(global_qtest, num);
> +}
> +
> +/**
Am 31.10.18 um 09:31 schrieb Michael Walle:
> Am 2018-07-18 12:48, schrieb Michael Walle:
>> It is only possible to retrieve the current state of an interrupt
>> line. But
>> there are devices which just pulses the interrupt line. Introduce a latch
>> which is set by qtest and which can be cleared
Am 2018-07-18 12:48, schrieb Michael Walle:
It is only possible to retrieve the current state of an interrupt line.
But
there are devices which just pulses the interrupt line. Introduce a
latch
which is set by qtest and which can be cleared by the test case.
Signed-off-by: Michael Walle
Cc: P
It is only possible to retrieve the current state of an interrupt line. But
there are devices which just pulses the interrupt line. Introduce a latch
which is set by qtest and which can be cleared by the test case.
Signed-off-by: Michael Walle
Cc: Paolo Bonzini
Cc: Andreas Färber
---
tests/lib
