From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from list by lists.gnu.org with archive (Exim 4.90_1) id 1uFYeY-0005AJ-I6 for mharc-qemu-trivial@gnu.org; Thu, 15 May 2025 09:29:39 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uFYeP-000511-Cj; Thu, 15 May 2025 09:29:29 -0400 Received: from mgamail.intel.com ([198.175.65.10]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uFYeJ-0004eZ-LF; Thu, 15 May 2025 09:29:26 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1747315764; x=1778851764; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=nD4jIMzPEL9GlBRMVD8jm1YlOuSAxd1LZIi/qkLyWyA=; b=Fvki2vRJyNjhad6+Qy58SR22nQs5CQQxJa0Cx9BKzB3JNPIDnSy55ykH tn+En0eIX4WCUl/vO12QWt8V5yb34oCFqFCYyF90Y8XSlmGmr1O6fJSGE PLteH2/0yAxC8QuVi3SHGkqZ7nGzGUK+ZMrxARVx5EgABRSnQVXBpeSIp rhVigrm0VnI2RA2pZ5JvRDxj7q79k0vlHmgDJqVnAR2IPiNVukjuWGFDL KxUS6qrFQEwmakrdZ0gFJiMprjRDaEjrJeZIrkeHbyEQ1jzueweQonflO jqMoZFtcGGNjYPJrPp97ubUUM/94XHqQ98/obgYqzuE13OCCGFcPLNBtk Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: NbWoZR5+Sfi047jRu5WFLQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: I1ZWHCMeQcmR4zLMMd+kmA== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11434"; a="66658082" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,291,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="66658082" Received: from fmviesa003.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.143]) by orvoesa102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 15 May 2025 06:29:19 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: M8NdgvHtQnKdJ4IAlWQcfw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: McE69DKsTyyJ1kCYn0ABkw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.15,291,1739865600"; d="scan'208";a="142386727" Received: from liuzhao-optiplex-7080.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.239.160.39]) by fmviesa003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 May 2025 06:29:16 -0700 Date: Thu, 15 May 2025 21:50:20 +0800 From: Zhao Liu To: BALATON Zoltan Cc: David Hildenbrand , Paolo Bonzini , Daniel P =?utf-8?B?LiBCZXJyYW5n77+9?= , Eduardo Habkost , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-trivial@nongnu.org, Halil Pasic , Christian Borntraeger , Thomas Huth , Richard Henderson , Ilya Leoshkevich , qemu-s390x@nongnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] target/s390x/kvm/pv: Consolidate OBJECT_DEFINE_SIMPLE_TYPE_WITH_INTERFACES Message-ID: References: <20250514084957.2221975-1-zhao1.liu@intel.com> <20250514084957.2221975-9-zhao1.liu@intel.com> <7dec9c8e-93d6-81f0-b075-e29b8ede44a2@eik.bme.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7dec9c8e-93d6-81f0-b075-e29b8ede44a2@eik.bme.hu> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=198.175.65.10; envelope-from=zhao1.liu@intel.com; helo=mgamail.intel.com X-Spam_score_int: -60 X-Spam_score: -6.1 X-Spam_bar: ------ X-Spam_report: (-6.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-1.686, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-trivial@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 May 2025 13:29:32 -0000 On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 06:24:03PM +0200, BALATON Zoltan wrote: > Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 18:24:03 +0200 > From: BALATON Zoltan > Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] target/s390x/kvm/pv: Consolidate > OBJECT_DEFINE_SIMPLE_TYPE_WITH_INTERFACES > > On Wed, 14 May 2025, Zhao Liu wrote: > > > > +OBJECT_DEFINE_SIMPLE_TYPE_WITH_INTERFACES(S390PVGuest, > > > > + s390_pv_guest, > > > > + S390_PV_GUEST, > > > > + CONFIDENTIAL_GUEST_SUPPORT, > > > > + { TYPE_USER_CREATABLE }, > > > > + { NULL }) > > > > > > I'll note that existing callers of OBJECT_DEFINE_SIMPLE_TYPE_WITH_INTERFACES > > > happily ignore the line limit and put it into a single line. > > > > > > (which ends up looking better IMHO) > > > > Ok, I'll onor the existing conventions (which I'll apply to other > > patches as well). > > There are two line limits. If something is clearer on one line you could > exceed the normal 80 chars and put up to 90 chars on one line for which > checkpatch will issue a warning that can be ignored for these cases. Over 90 > lines checkpatch will give an error and I think you should not ignore that. Thank you. This makes sense! > Maybe try to put as much on one line as possible instead of new line after > each argument but without exceeding the 80 chars or if the whole line fits > in 90 chars then use that. Or maybe do not indent second line under ( but > with 4 spaces then you can fit it in two lines but lines over 90 chars are > undesirable. HMM, I understand you mean: OBJECT_DEFINE_SIMPLE_TYPE_WITH_INTERFACES(S390PVGuest, s390_pv_guest, S390_PV_GUEST, CONFIDENTIAL_GUEST_SUPPORT, { TYPE_USER_CREATABLE }, { NULL }) The second line is 82 chars and now I think this version is better. Thanks, Zhao