On 2012-10-18 00:13, Alex Williamson wrote:
> Rather than assert, simply return PCI_INTX_DISABLED when we don't
> have a pci_route_irq_fn. PIIX already returns DISABLED for an
> invalid pin, so users already deal with this state. Users of this
> interface should only be acting on an ENABLED or INVERTED return
> value (though we really have no support for INVERTED). Also
> complain loudly when we hit this so we don't forget it's missing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Williamson <alex.william...@redhat.com>
> ---
>
> v2: Turn up the annoyance factor for hitting this
>
> hw/pci.c | 8 +++++++-
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/pci.c b/hw/pci.c
> index 83d262a..6a66b32 100644
> --- a/hw/pci.c
> +++ b/hw/pci.c
> @@ -1094,7 +1094,13 @@ PCIINTxRoute pci_device_route_intx_to_irq(PCIDevice
> *dev, int pin)
> pin = bus->map_irq(dev, pin);
> dev = bus->parent_dev;
> } while (dev);
> - assert(bus->route_intx_to_irq);
> +
> + if (!bus->route_intx_to_irq) {
> + error_report("PCI: Bug - unimplemented PCI INTx routing (%s)\n",
> + object_get_typename(OBJECT(bus->qbus.parent)));
> + return (PCIINTxRoute) { PCI_INTX_DISABLED, -1 };
> + }
> +
> return bus->route_intx_to_irq(bus->irq_opaque, pin);
> }
>
>
I'm fine with this. I also see this as dead code in x86 (any x86 chipset
will support this API, for sure), but maybe it helps on other archs. So:
Acked-by: Jan Kiszka <jan.kis...@siemens.com>
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SDP-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
