From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1O90Jk-0004Ti-Rg
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 03 May 2010 14:24:32 -0400
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=46507 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O90Jc-0003ND-5U
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 03 May 2010 14:24:32 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1O90JS-0003LC-A4
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 03 May 2010 14:24:15 -0400
Received: from mail-gy0-f173.google.com ([209.85.160.173]:40695)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1O90JP-0003KL-Ir
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 03 May 2010 14:24:14 -0400
Received: by gyd5 with SMTP id 5so1297486gyd.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 03 May 2010 11:24:10 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <4BDF14C2.1030404@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 13:24:02 -0500
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] Write cmos hd data for ide drives	 using
	-device parm
References: <4BC482850200004800092E82@sinclair.provo.novell.com>	<4BC56D9A.7010606@redhat.com>	<4BCC63030200004800093962@sinclair.provo.novell.com>
	<4BCD5796.1030502@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4BCD5796.1030502@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Bruce Rogers <brogers@novell.com>

On 04/20/2010 02:28 AM, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>   Hi,
>
>> Not much traffic on this thread ;-)
>
> Indeed ;)
>
>> I can see the usefulness of an init_late() to generalize post device 
>> setup issues.
>> I assume then that you didn't have any other issues with my patch, 
>> other than general code structure concerns?
>
> Yes, that is the major one.  I think it is much saner to just have a 
> init_late() and collect everything there instead of creating a new 
> hook each time you figure you need one.
>
> I think this also allows to make the ide changes less intrusive as all 
> the cmos setup logic stays local to pc.c.  pc.c can simply keep a 
> pointer to the DeviceState structs of the ide interface(s) created in 
> pc_init1().  pc_init_late() then can check which drives are plugged in 
> and update cmos accordingly.

I'd personally prefer to see some sort of registration mechanism.  
Something notifier based.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> cheers,
>   Gerd
>
>
>
>