From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1BBFC2BB86 for ; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 23:34:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B89620692 for ; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 23:34:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="q3uL+kWe" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 8B89620692 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:38782 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jNm70-0000SX-OZ for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 19:34:02 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55660) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jNm6E-0007bH-3g for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 19:33:15 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jNm6C-0003HV-SR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 19:33:14 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x442.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::442]:35841) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jNm6C-0003HG-Mf; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 19:33:12 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-x442.google.com with SMTP id n10so3780124pff.3; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 16:33:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=phXCUNuj9LrRllA2EedbED7LHYuP4y9u3+mfpjFDGTE=; b=q3uL+kWevFRqM95kHt7nMEVDuRy/FJjWqmIJG314phsFFyqZ469x+h51f0vnBOJdiO FrLklWGGO25atekvEpcjTANLZIT8IPSCZppAog47YKyPW9icqt5jn/BPUpGoSBKL48G2 M3lF0/MkkcecwtDWqGNkQwNaiUDCrym63yg20J+1T8iL1FBZsd15NSdeUVZxrYg2uGuj OYeesfTAIj2pa+IstPCQ0aPUVrpUNixC0ZrU+CqJ0lK124kqjsUjXzNY4h7QIDr+I0fn hgjKgtkXZGYWFfwzVHrMkTERugvRe7uy5si8Nl02uIq2Osg99GT7z1G6Vr/t484dKaWn CClQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=phXCUNuj9LrRllA2EedbED7LHYuP4y9u3+mfpjFDGTE=; b=oto+jOJCLq2KNUymP10YYAR79sRRPIdUbzJxv28s6mPgLh4pfZEL8Qkaxh0IRRTwmw n19FZULI49mBsdWIUYNiSZJZqJvQjeLbXXY0/J84xOwkLtb6Dp+KdcR5tZYG6mgtvyox pwBwoTzG1+XvyGLXwT6LK5oazXN7KM8oy7CLFkPyPLVz6hvPyBpONuO8XMN9ae0O+54/ maCpLBfoedAqyR6DPoZfZv7cVTZuoWrD7RLNHIjtntnbi8MrNbHKtFRWzbJFcTejMhxc D85ewVB7WNzAEvINNEVXL6lPOK5sV3o9q4QUK9pc993nwRft4JI0tNtLzjzzCjXqc2hb rToQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuaLTaLTvnysS033fCs9ehAyU6zcGYEyYprObLquszx4DisgrnVs FyMWocr4dNHiaFG83QNp1AIRRbeZ X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJYu6iY3dCq6vE6hf7mQnIrdq2MBsESe9vbx+UHtVxqJtOWtonUoF3Th8J9SuWN+WAQt79q3g== X-Received: by 2002:a63:dd0a:: with SMTP id t10mr14414229pgg.229.1586734391508; Sun, 12 Apr 2020 16:33:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (g19.222-224-154.ppp.wakwak.ne.jp. [222.224.154.19]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k21sm3962787pfg.114.2020.04.12.16.33.10 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 12 Apr 2020 16:33:10 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2020 08:33:08 +0900 From: Stafford Horne To: Philippe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mathieu-Daud=E9?= Subject: Re: [PATCH-for-5.0? 3/3] hw/openrisc/pic_cpu: Use qdev gpio rather than qemu_allocate_irqs() Message-ID: <20200412233308.GS7926@lianli.shorne-pla.net> References: <20200412212943.4117-1-f4bug@amsat.org> <20200412212943.4117-4-f4bug@amsat.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20200412212943.4117-4-f4bug@amsat.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.4 (2019-03-13) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4864:20::442 X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Peter Maydell , qemu-block@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Aleksandar Markovic , Aleksandar Rikalo , John Snow , Aurelien Jarno Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Sun, Apr 12, 2020 at 11:29:43PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > Switch to using the qdev gpio API which is preferred over > qemu_allocate_irqs(). Doing so we also stop leaking the > allocated memory. One step to eventually deprecate and > remove qemu_allocate_irqs() one day. > > Patch created mechanically using spatch with this script > inspired from commit d6ef883d9d7: > > @@ > typedef qemu_irq; > identifier irqs, handler; > expression opaque, count, i; > @@ > - qemu_irq *irqs; > ... > - irqs = qemu_allocate_irqs(handler, opaque, count); > + qdev_init_gpio_in(DEVICE(opaque), handler, count); > <+... > - irqs[i] > + qdev_get_gpio_in(DEVICE(opaque), i) > ...+> > ?- g_free(irqs); > > Inspired-by: Peter Maydell > Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé > --- > hw/openrisc/pic_cpu.c | 5 ++--- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/openrisc/pic_cpu.c b/hw/openrisc/pic_cpu.c > index 36f9350830..4b0c92f842 100644 > --- a/hw/openrisc/pic_cpu.c > +++ b/hw/openrisc/pic_cpu.c > @@ -52,10 +52,9 @@ static void openrisc_pic_cpu_handler(void *opaque, int irq, int level) > void cpu_openrisc_pic_init(OpenRISCCPU *cpu) > { > int i; > - qemu_irq *qi; > - qi = qemu_allocate_irqs(openrisc_pic_cpu_handler, cpu, NR_IRQS); > + qdev_init_gpio_in(DEVICE(cpu), openrisc_pic_cpu_handler, NR_IRQS); > > for (i = 0; i < NR_IRQS; i++) { > - cpu->env.irq[i] = qi[i]; > + cpu->env.irq[i] = qdev_get_gpio_in(DEVICE(cpu), i); > } > } This looks fine to me. Why do you have the '5.0?' in the subject? -Stafford