@@ -58,7 +58,9 @@ void ppc_set_irq(PowerPCCPU *cpu, int irq, int level)
if (old_pending != env->pending_interrupts) {
ppc_maybe_interrupt(env);
- kvmppc_set_interrupt(cpu, irq, level);
+ if (kvm_enabled()) {
+ kvmppc_set_interrupt(cpu, irq, level);
+ }
}
trace_ppc_irq_set_exit(env, irq, level, env->pending_interrupts,
@@ -1465,5 +1467,7 @@ void ppc_irq_reset(PowerPCCPU *cpu)
CPUPPCState *env = &cpu->env;
env->irq_input_state = 0;
- kvmppc_set_interrupt(cpu, PPC_INTERRUPT_EXT, 0);
+ if (kvm_enabled()) {
+ kvmppc_set_interrupt(cpu, PPC_INTERRUPT_EXT, 0);
+ }
}
@@ -1315,7 +1315,7 @@ int kvmppc_set_interrupt(PowerPCCPU *cpu, int irq, int level)
return 0;
}
- if (!kvm_enabled() || !cap_interrupt_unset) {
+ if (!cap_interrupt_unset) {
return 0;
}
It's unnecessary for non-KVM accelerators(TCG, for example), to call this function, so change the order of kvm_enable() judgment. The static inline function that returns -1 directly does not work in TCG's situation. Signed-off-by: jianchunfu <chunfu.jian@shingroup.cn> --- hw/ppc/ppc.c | 8 ++++++-- target/ppc/kvm.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)