On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 11:23:58PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 15 August 2013 23:18, Guenter Roeck <li...@roeck-us.net> wrote: > > But doesn't that mean that there is _currently_ no problem ? If so, > > we can introduce the additional code when the problem really shows up. > > Being Preemptive is good, but if it is not really needed today > > I would rather have today's problems resolved and bother about tomorrow's > > when they show up. > > Conceptually the two parts go together: rely on correct > irq routing, tell qemu we rely on correct irq routing. > It's only one extra line... > Possibly, but the lack of progress suggests that by tying both parts together we might get neither accepted.
Old saying - surgery successful, patient dead. Guenter
