From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= <afaerber@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] What to do about non-qdevified devices?
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 18:14:32 +0100
Message-ID: <510954F8.6010307@suse.de>
References: <871ud4gfoa.fsf@elfo.elfo> <510836DD.3010707@suse.de> <87sj5j7jo8.fsf@codemonkey.ws> <87pq0n887o.fsf_-_@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <CAFEAcA9ewLyJfwD3YDdv=uyzmRqjZw_RpR+yB_sSDE-o=-DEkQ@mail.gmail.com> <874nhy3l2q.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org> <510923C1.5090904@suse.de> <5109512C.1050903@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Cc: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>,
	Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
	Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>,
	KVM devel mailing list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
	Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>,
	qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:60097 "EHLO mx2.suse.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1754379Ab3A3ROn (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 30 Jan 2013 12:14:43 -0500
In-Reply-To: <5109512C.1050903@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

Am 30.01.2013 17:58, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
> Il 30/01/2013 14:44, Andreas F=E4rber ha scritto:
>> I disagree on the "or else" part. I have been qdev'ifying and QOM'if=
ying
>> devices in my maintenance area, and progress is slow. It gets even
>> slower if one leaves clearly maintained areas. I see no good reason =
to
>> force a pistol on someone's breast, like you have done for IDE, unle=
ss
>> there is a good reason to do so. Currently I don't see any.
>=20
> The reason for IDE is that it involved devices that are not
> SysBusDevices (the IDE disk devices).  Having the same code work in t=
wo
> ways, one qdevified and one not, is bad.

Sure, I did help with the QOM'ification there. "Currently I don't see
any [good reason]" by contrast referred to removing *all* devices that
are not yet qdev/QOM'ified without such pressing reason.

> For simple SysBusDevice you're changing a crappy default to a less ba=
d
> one, but there's really little incentive to qdev/QOM-ification.

No disagreement. The benefits don't come from doing a conversion, they
come from basing new work on the result of a conversion. :)

Andreas

--=20
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=FCrnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imend=F6rffer; HRB 16746 AG N=FCrn=
berg