Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] qom: helper macro for adding read-only properties

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

Il 16/09/2013 17:24, Andreas Färber ha scritto:
>> > 
>> > Shouldn't we have a constant for the "realized" string?
> That's a two-sided sword: We actually shouldn't be setting realized =
> true manually but once on machine init - in that case we wouldn't
> strictly need a constant.
> 
> I pushed to get that central infrastructure in place to spare me/us the
> repetitive realized = true setting, but Paolo shot it down, asking for a
> full-fledged solver to make ordering guarantees.
> 

Actually, I said my understanding of the problem was that we have two
"conflicting" hierarchies.

I didn't really ask for a solver, more like a topological sort actually,
which is very simple to implement.

But above everything else I asked to prove me wrong.  I provided IIRC an
example where the hierarchies were conflicting, could that example be
incorrect?

The discussion died down.  Could it be a topic for tomorrow's call?  I
certainly would prefer to have realized = true at machine-ready time, I
think it was even part of the very first RFC realized series that were
posted.

Paolo