From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alon Levy Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes for November 29 Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 16:35:23 +0200 Message-ID: <20111130143523.GC19650@garlic.tlv.redhat.com> References: <8762i3nczx.fsf@trasno.mitica> <4ED50F7C.2040903@redhat.com> <4ED563E7.3040508@codemonkey.ws> <20111130092237.GB24074@garlic> <20111130095456.GE28621@redhat.com> <4ED63596.6090303@codemonkey.ws> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Daniel P. Berrange" , Avi Kivity , quintela@redhat.com, Developers qemu-devel , KVM devel mailing list To: Anthony Liguori Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:8496 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752433Ab1K3Ofc (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Nov 2011 09:35:32 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4ED63596.6090303@codemonkey.ws> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 07:54:30AM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote: [snip] > But the way we're structuring QOM, we could do very simple bindings > that just used introspection (much like GObject does). Is this the current tree? http://repo.or.cz/w/qemu/aliguori.git/tree/refs/heads/qom > > The vast majority of work is fitting everything into an object > model. Doing the bindings is actually fairly simple. > > Regards, > > Anthony Liguori > [snip]