On 10/14/2016 08:36 AM, David Gibson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 09:24:55AM +0200, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
>> From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <b...@kernel.crashing.org>
>>
>> It adds the Naples chip which supports proper LPC interrupts via the
>> LPC controller rather than via an external CPLD.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <b...@kernel.crashing.org>
>> [clg: - updated for qemu-2.7
>> - ported on latest PowerNV patchset (v3) ]
>> Signed-off-by: Cédric Le Goater <c...@kaod.org>
>> ---
>> hw/ppc/pnv.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
>> hw/ppc/pnv_lpc.c | 47
>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>> include/hw/ppc/pnv_lpc.h | 7 +++++++
>> 3 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/ppc/pnv.c b/hw/ppc/pnv.c
>> index e805e97d4d87..5b70ccf66fac 100644
>> --- a/hw/ppc/pnv.c
>> +++ b/hw/ppc/pnv.c
>> @@ -340,7 +340,17 @@ static void pnv_lpc_isa_irq_handler_cpld(void *opaque,
>> int n, int level)
>>
>> static void pnv_lpc_isa_irq_handler(void *opaque, int n, int level)
>> {
>> - /* XXX TODO */
>> + PnvLpcController *lpc = opaque;
>> +
>> + if (n >= ISA_NUM_IRQS) {
>> + return;
>> + }
>
> How could n >= ISA_NUM_IRQS arise? Would it have to mean a bug
> elsewhere in your code? If so this should be an assert().
It cannot. I should remove it.
Thanks,
C.
