From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33696) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YVKF5-00009F-LJ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 09:30:45 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YVKF1-00036V-He for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 09:30:39 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:36408 helo=mx2.suse.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YVKF1-00034s-Bg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 09:30:35 -0400 Message-ID: <54FEF1FA.2070506@suse.de> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 14:30:34 +0100 From: =?windows-1252?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1425576411-32639-1-git-send-email-ehabkost@redhat.com> <1425576411-32639-2-git-send-email-ehabkost@redhat.com> <54FEDA6F.9000802@suse.de> <20150310124237.GZ3513@thinpad.lan.raisama.net> <54FEE8CE.60202@suse.de> <20150310132408.GA3513@thinpad.lan.raisama.net> In-Reply-To: <20150310132408.GA3513@thinpad.lan.raisama.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/1] target-i386: Remove icc_bridge parameter from cpu_x86_create() List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eduardo Habkost Cc: zhugh.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com, "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Bharata B Rao , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com, chen.fan.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com, isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com, Paolo Bonzini , Gu Zheng , Igor Mammedov , anshul.makkar@profitbricks.com Am 10.03.2015 um 14:24 schrieb Eduardo Habkost: > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 01:51:26PM +0100, Andreas F=E4rber wrote: >> Am 10.03.2015 um 13:42 schrieb Eduardo Habkost: >>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 12:50:07PM +0100, Andreas F=E4rber wrote: >>>> Am 05.03.2015 um 18:26 schrieb Eduardo Habkost: >>>>> Instead of passing icc_bridge from the PC initialization code to >>>>> cpu_x86_create(), make the PC initialization code attach the CPU to >>>>> icc_bridge. >>>>> >>>>> The only difference here is that icc_bridge attachment will now be = done >>>>> after x86_cpu_parse_featurestr() is called. But this shouldn't make= any >>>>> difference, as property setters shouldn't depend on icc_bridge. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost >>>> >>>> Looks okay to me, >>>> >>>> Reviewed-by: Andreas F=E4rber >>>> >>>> But using this smaller patch will still make inlining pc_new_cpu(), >>>> where you are moving it to, bigger diffstat-wise (WIP). >>> >>> I just see this it as a reason to not inline pc_new_cpu(). :) >> >> Did you actually read my code? cpu_x86_create() does not allow in-plac= e >> initialization, in addition to doing the realized=3Dtrue. >=20 > I hadn't, sorry, I was simply thinking in general terms, where I > wouldn't want to inline a function if that would mean duplicating code. >=20 > I did read the qom-cpu-x86 code now, and I still don't see why you woul= d > want to duplicate existing pc_new_cpu() code that is needed on both cal= l > sites. I assume there is a way to avoid code duplication and still allo= w > in-place initialization. >=20 > Anyway, this discussion about diff sizes and duplication will be > obsolete as soon as we apply a new version of the icc-bus removal patch= . > So I would prefer to discuss the details once we have a new patch My series (and Bharata's) cannot wait for some ominous new ICC removal patch, which you yourself said would take some time to review and test... In short, if the only thing in common is setting apic-id and the icc bridge parent, is that really worth having a function for? (Care to join #qemu?) Andreas --=20 SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=FCrnberg, Germany GF: Felix Imend=F6rffer, Jane Smithard, Jennifer Guild, Dilip Upmanyu, Graham Norton; HRB 21284 (AG N=FCrnberg)