From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
To: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Cc: Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>,
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>,
qemu-trivial@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
like.xu@intel.com, Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] core/qdev: refactor qdev_get_machine() with type assertion
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 07:14:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ftqh1ae5.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190416212003.GB2272@habkost.net> (Eduardo Habkost's message of "Tue, 16 Apr 2019 18:20:03 -0300")
Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 03:59:45PM +0800, Like Xu wrote:
>> To avoid the misuse of qdev_get_machine() if machine hasn't been created yet,
>> this patch uses qdev_get_machine_uncheck() for obj-common (share with user-only
>> mode) and adds type assertion to qdev_get_machine() in system-emulation mode.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
>
> I'm queueing the series on machine-next, thanks!
Hold your horses, please.
I dislike the name qdev_get_machine_uncheck(). I could live with
qdev_get_machine_unchecked().
However, I doubt this is the right approach.
The issue at hand is undisciplined creation of QOM object /machine.
This patch adds an asseertion "undisciplined creation of /machine didn't
create crap", but only in some places.
I think we should never create /machine as (surprising!) side effect of
qdev_get_machine(). Create it explicitly instead, and have
qdev_get_machine() use object_resolve_path("/machine", NULL) to get it.
Look ma, no side effects.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
To: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Cc: Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>,
Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>,
qemu-trivial@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
like.xu@intel.com, Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] core/qdev: refactor qdev_get_machine() with type assertion
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 07:14:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ftqh1ae5.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190416212003.GB2272@habkost.net> (Eduardo Habkost's message of "Tue, 16 Apr 2019 18:20:03 -0300")
Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 03:59:45PM +0800, Like Xu wrote:
>> To avoid the misuse of qdev_get_machine() if machine hasn't been created yet,
>> this patch uses qdev_get_machine_uncheck() for obj-common (share with user-only
>> mode) and adds type assertion to qdev_get_machine() in system-emulation mode.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
>
> I'm queueing the series on machine-next, thanks!
Hold your horses, please.
I dislike the name qdev_get_machine_uncheck(). I could live with
qdev_get_machine_unchecked().
However, I doubt this is the right approach.
The issue at hand is undisciplined creation of QOM object /machine.
This patch adds an asseertion "undisciplined creation of /machine didn't
create crap", but only in some places.
I think we should never create /machine as (surprising!) side effect of
qdev_get_machine(). Create it explicitly instead, and have
qdev_get_machine() use object_resolve_path("/machine", NULL) to get it.
Look ma, no side effects.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
To: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>, Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>,
qemu-trivial@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
like.xu@intel.com, Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] core/qdev: refactor qdev_get_machine() with type assertion
Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 07:14:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ftqh1ae5.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> (raw)
Message-ID: <20190417051410.I-ixmo5wuspE2iZ4oTTcy8m2Z1i1ocvTJCCgeYzxSP8@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190416212003.GB2272@habkost.net> (Eduardo Habkost's message of "Tue, 16 Apr 2019 18:20:03 -0300")
Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> writes:
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 03:59:45PM +0800, Like Xu wrote:
>> To avoid the misuse of qdev_get_machine() if machine hasn't been created yet,
>> this patch uses qdev_get_machine_uncheck() for obj-common (share with user-only
>> mode) and adds type assertion to qdev_get_machine() in system-emulation mode.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Like Xu <like.xu@linux.intel.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
>
> I'm queueing the series on machine-next, thanks!
Hold your horses, please.
I dislike the name qdev_get_machine_uncheck(). I could live with
qdev_get_machine_unchecked().
However, I doubt this is the right approach.
The issue at hand is undisciplined creation of QOM object /machine.
This patch adds an asseertion "undisciplined creation of /machine didn't
create crap", but only in some places.
I think we should never create /machine as (surprising!) side effect of
qdev_get_machine(). Create it explicitly instead, and have
qdev_get_machine() use object_resolve_path("/machine", NULL) to get it.
Look ma, no side effects.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-17 5:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-15 7:59 [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 0/2] vl.c: make current_machine as non-global variable Like Xu
2019-04-15 7:59 ` Like Xu
2019-04-15 7:59 ` Like Xu
2019-04-15 7:59 ` [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 1/2] vl.c: refactor " Like Xu
2019-04-15 7:59 ` Like Xu
2019-04-15 7:59 ` Like Xu
2019-04-16 21:16 ` [Qemu-trivial] " Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-16 21:16 ` Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-16 21:16 ` Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-17 5:26 ` [Qemu-trivial] " Markus Armbruster
2019-04-17 5:26 ` Markus Armbruster
2019-04-17 5:26 ` Markus Armbruster
2019-04-17 17:05 ` [Qemu-trivial] " Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-17 17:05 ` Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-17 17:05 ` Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-15 7:59 ` [Qemu-trivial] [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 2/2] core/qdev: refactor qdev_get_machine() with type assertion Like Xu
2019-04-15 7:59 ` Like Xu
2019-04-15 7:59 ` Like Xu
2019-04-16 21:20 ` [Qemu-trivial] " Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-16 21:20 ` Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-16 21:20 ` Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-17 5:14 ` Markus Armbruster [this message]
2019-04-17 5:14 ` Markus Armbruster
2019-04-17 5:14 ` Markus Armbruster
2019-04-17 17:10 ` [Qemu-trivial] " Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-17 17:10 ` Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-17 17:10 ` Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-23 7:59 ` [Qemu-trivial] " Like Xu
2019-04-23 7:59 ` Like Xu
2019-04-24 17:21 ` [Qemu-trivial] " Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-24 17:21 ` Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-24 17:21 ` Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-25 3:12 ` [Qemu-trivial] " Like Xu
2019-04-25 3:12 ` Like Xu
2019-04-25 17:48 ` [Qemu-trivial] " Eduardo Habkost
2019-04-25 17:48 ` Eduardo Habkost
2019-05-06 11:17 ` [Qemu-trivial] " Markus Armbruster
2019-05-06 11:17 ` Markus Armbruster
2019-05-06 11:15 ` [Qemu-trivial] " Markus Armbruster
2019-05-06 11:15 ` Markus Armbruster
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87ftqh1ae5.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org \
--to=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=imammedo@redhat.com \
--cc=like.xu@intel.com \
--cc=like.xu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-trivial@nongnu.org \
--cc=thuth@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.