From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:55837)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1TJpth-0003u5-Ja
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2012 14:11:46 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1TJptg-0000En-I9
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2012 14:11:45 -0400
Received: from mail-oa0-f45.google.com ([209.85.219.45]:57621)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1TJmPR-0006rn-NE
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2012 10:28:17 -0400
Received: by mail-oa0-f45.google.com with SMTP id i18so489800oag.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Thu, 04 Oct 2012 07:28:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
In-Reply-To: <506D940D.7080600@redhat.com>
References: <1349270954-4657-1-git-send-email-ehabkost@redhat.com>
	<1349270954-4657-2-git-send-email-ehabkost@redhat.com>
	<877gr6jqnt.fsf@codemonkey.ws> <506D940D.7080600@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2012 09:28:13 -0500
Message-ID: <87fw5uxqf6.fsf@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC 01/18] pc: create "PC" device class
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>, Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>, Andreas =?utf-8?Q?F=C3=A4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> writes:

> Il 04/10/2012 15:46, Anthony Liguori ha scritto:
>>> > +typedef struct PC {
>>> > +    DeviceState parent_obj;
>>> > +} PC;
>> So the general problem with this approach is that it strays from
>> modeling hardware.
>
> It doesn't really; it's a motherboard object, there's no reason why
> /machine shouldn't be a Device itself, with a few objects (CPUs, the
> i440FX, the IOAPIC, and of course the peripherals) hanging off it.

Okay, but modeling a motherboard is different than creating a "PC"
object and throwing in the kitchen skink.

And I'm not sure that going top-down is the best strategy.  I think
going bottom up makes more sense (starting with modeling Super IO chip).

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>
> Paolo