From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for Tuesday 7
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:52:10 +0100
Message-ID: <4F312C8A.9080700@redhat.com>
References: <87ehu7pxvf.fsf@elfo.elfo> <4F312AFC.6020908@suse.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15;
	format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Cc: quintela@redhat.com, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>,
	KVM devel mailing list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Developers qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
To: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46]:61249 "EHLO
	mail-pz0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1756530Ab2BGNwR (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 7 Feb 2012 08:52:17 -0500
Received: by daed14 with SMTP id d14so407807dae.19
        for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Tue, 07 Feb 2012 05:52:16 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4F312AFC.6020908@suse.de>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On 02/07/2012 02:45 PM, Andreas F=E4rber wrote:
> Another topic that can be answered by email is what the time planning
> for the 4th QOM series looks like. Are there things that developers o=
f
> new devices should keep in mind / start doing differently wrt SysBus?

Another related question is, should the 4th QOM series present a full=20
composition tree based on the legacy qdev bus concept?  Currently it=20
doesn't, but if not, why not?  That would help _a lot_ with removing=20
PROP_PTR.

Paolo