Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] hw/i2c: add dummy device

["Cédric Le Goater" <clg@kaod.org>]

On 10/29/26 09:20, Timur Maksimov wrote:
> Hi, Markus
> 
> On Thu, 2026-10-29 at 08:22 +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Timur Maksimov <gessingate@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Hi, thanks for the review.
>>>
>>> It was my decision to use such API, I thought it would be okay for
>>> a
>>> test device. I don't think there is a way to expose integer array
>>> as a
>>> single QOM property.
>>
>> There are ways, but I need to know what you're trying to accomplish
>> to
>> be able to provide guidance.
> 
> We need to access the transfer buffer array with QOM. Actually, I have
> a few ideas on how to do this without cluttering the QOM with
> properties, such as using a FIFO interface.
>>
>>> Actually, we can go without this model. I suppose I will rewrite
>>> tests
>>> so they don't use it.
>>
>> You haven't answered my question on code-provenance.rst.
>>
>>> On Wed, 2026-10-28 at 11:17 +0100, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>>> Cédric Le Goater <clg@kaod.org> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> + Corey for I2C feed back.
>>>>>
>>>>> + Markus for QOM
>>>>>
>>>>> The brute-force solution to expose the contents of the device
>>>>> array
>>>>> with 128 properties has a slight AI smell. I find it ugly but I
>>>>> am
>>>>> human :)
>>>>
>>>> Timur, have you read docs/devel/code-provenance.rst section "Use
>>>> of
>>>> AI-generated content"?
>>>>
>>>>>           That said I don't know if there are better
>>>>> alternatives.
>>
>> [...]
> 
> Sorry. Yes, I have read it. This is solely my work, no AI was used to
> write it.
> 
> I also have a question about MAINTAINERS file. If we keep this device,
> where should I put this file?

You can put it under Aspeed for now, since it will be only used by
Aspeed machines for tests. If it grows, I guess we should move it
under "I2C and SMBus" if Corey agrees.

Thanks,

C.