Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH qemu] RFC: memory/hmp: Print owners/parents in "info mtree"

[Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>]

Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> writes:

> On 17/04/2018 14:18, Igor Mammedov wrote:
>>> What's the point of an object name if it cannot be unique?
>> It should be sufficient for it to be unique within parent's
>> scope and object_property_add_child() should make sure that
>> added object is unique within its parent's namespace.
>> Having named object from starters is useful as object
>> won't have to piggyback on parent (object_get_canonical_path_component)
>> when it need its own name. Then named object could use its name
>> freely anywhere including initfn, property setters/getters and
>> let object_property_add_child() take care of possible name
>> conflict.
>
> I agree that it looks nice, but I'm worried that people forget that the
> path component is only unique until object_unparent().  The use for
> DEVICE_DELETED events is already a bad thing...

Hmm.  If the canonical QOM path isn't the proper way to identify a
device in QMP, what else is?  Honest question!