On 07/02/2018 19:37, Roman Kagan wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 11:45:28AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 06/02/2018 21:30, Roman Kagan wrote:
>>> +static SynICState *get_synic(X86CPU *cpu)
>>> +{
>>> +SynICState *synic =
>>> +SYNIC(object_resolve_path_component(OBJECT(cpu), "synic
On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 11:45:28AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 06/02/2018 21:30, Roman Kagan wrote:
> > +static SynICState *get_synic(X86CPU *cpu)
> > +{
> > +SynICState *synic =
> > +SYNIC(object_resolve_path_component(OBJECT(cpu), "synic"));
> > +assert(synic);
> > +retur
On 06/02/2018 21:30, Roman Kagan wrote:
> +static SynICState *get_synic(X86CPU *cpu)
> +{
> +SynICState *synic =
> +SYNIC(object_resolve_path_component(OBJECT(cpu), "synic"));
> +assert(synic);
> +return synic;
> +}
> +
This is somewhat slow, maybe add the pointer to X86CPU?
>
Make Hyper-V SynIC a device which is attached as a child to X86CPU. For
now it only makes SynIC visibile in the qom hierarchy, and maintains its
internal fields in sync with the respecitve msrs of the parent cpu (the
fields will be used in followup patches).
Signed-off-by: Roman Kagan
---
targe
