From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] Don't call apic functions directly from kvm code
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 11:00:22 -0300
Message-ID: <20100317140022.GA9951@mothafucka.localdomain>
References: <1267215141-13629-1-git-send-email-glommer@redhat.com>
 <1267215141-13629-2-git-send-email-glommer@redhat.com>
 <1267215141-13629-3-git-send-email-glommer@redhat.com>
 <1267215141-13629-4-git-send-email-glommer@redhat.com>
 <1267215141-13629-5-git-send-email-glommer@redhat.com>
 <1267215141-13629-6-git-send-email-glommer@redhat.com>
 <4B964CA6.9050909@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, mtosatti@redhat.com
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46149 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753605Ab0CQOAZ (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 17 Mar 2010 10:00:25 -0400
Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o2HE0OBe026338
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK)
	for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 10:00:25 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4B964CA6.9050909@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 03:27:02PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 02/26/2010 10:12 PM, Glauber Costa wrote:
> >It is actually not necessary to call a tpr function to save and load cr8,
> >as cr8 is part of the processor state, and thus, it is much easier
> >to just add it to CPUState.
> >
> >As for apic base, wrap kvm usages, so we can call either the qemu device,
> >or the in kernel version.
> >
> >
> >  }
> >
> >+static void kvm_set_apic_base(CPUState *env, uint64_t val)
> >+{
> >+    if (!kvm_irqchip_in_kernel())
> >+        cpu_set_apic_base(env, val);
> 
> What if it is in kernel?  Just ignored?  Doesn't seem right.
At this point it is right, because there is no irqchip in kernel yet.

In a later patch, irqchip in kernel begins to exist, and this function
gets filled.