On Fri, 16 Oct 2020 13:43:25 +0200
Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com>
> ---
> include/hw/i386/microvm.h | 2 +-
> hw/i386/microvm.c | 9 +++++++--
> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/hw/i386/microvm.h b/include/hw/i386/microvm.h
> index 91b064575d55..0154ad5bd707 100644
> --- a/include/hw/i386/microvm.h
> +++ b/include/hw/i386/microvm.h
> @@ -52,7 +52,6 @@
>
> /* Platform virtio definitions */
> #define VIRTIO_MMIO_BASE 0xfeb00000
> -#define VIRTIO_NUM_TRANSPORTS 8
> #define VIRTIO_CMDLINE_MAXLEN 64
>
> #define GED_MMIO_BASE 0xfea00000
> @@ -95,6 +94,7 @@ struct MicrovmMachineState {
>
> /* Machine state */
> uint32_t virtio_irq_base;
> + uint32_t virtio_num_transports;
> bool kernel_cmdline_fixed;
> Notifier machine_done;
> Notifier powerdown_req;
> diff --git a/hw/i386/microvm.c b/hw/i386/microvm.c
> index 9dd74458aca4..eaf5da31f7e1 100644
> --- a/hw/i386/microvm.c
> +++ b/hw/i386/microvm.c
> @@ -177,8 +177,13 @@ static void microvm_devices_init(MicrovmMachineState
> *mms)
>
> kvmclock_create(true);
>
> - mms->virtio_irq_base = x86_machine_is_acpi_enabled(x86ms) ? 16 : 5;
> - for (i = 0; i < VIRTIO_NUM_TRANSPORTS; i++) {
> + mms->virtio_irq_base = 5;
> + mms->virtio_num_transports = 8;
> + if (x86_machine_is_acpi_enabled(x86ms)) {
> + mms->virtio_irq_base = 16;
> + }
can we unify and use the same base in both cases?
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < mms->virtio_num_transports; i++) {
> sysbus_create_simple("virtio-mmio",
> VIRTIO_MMIO_BASE + i * 512,
> x86ms->gsi[mms->virtio_irq_base + i]);
