From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MnrRL-0008B8-9F
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Sep 2009 06:08:43 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MnrRG-0008AZ-Hp
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Sep 2009 06:08:42 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=51800 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MnrRG-0008AW-9r
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Sep 2009 06:08:38 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:10757)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1MnrRF-0007zy-KV
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 16 Sep 2009 06:08:37 -0400
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 13:06:13 +0300
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20090916100613.GA4298@redhat.com>
References: <cover.1253025151.git.mst@redhat.com>
	<20090915143319.GB24708@redhat.com>
	<m3vdjjutwa.fsf@neno.mitica> <20090916093445.GA1404@redhat.com>
	<4AB0B875.2060507@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4AB0B875.2060507@redhat.com>
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/2] qemu/qdev: type safety in reset handler
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc: Carsten Otte <cotte@de.ibm.com>, markmc@redhat.com, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Juan Quintela <quintela@trasno.org>

On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 12:05:41PM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>   Hi,
>
>>> Otherwise, I prefer the old version.  We test if there exist
>>>    dev->info->reset
>>> and just after that, we use
>>>    dev->info->reset()
>>
>> Good point. I think I'll just move the if (dev->info->reset)
>> into qdev_reset.
>
> How about going one step further?  Register *one* qdev_reset instance  
> which then walks the qdev tree and calls ->reset() for every device?

Will be much more code. Why not reuse the existing queue?

> cheers,
>   Gerd