From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=39520 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q6kFG-0007vN-DY
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 09:55:28 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <yamahata@valinux.co.jp>) id 1Q6kF0-0001Cv-Dv
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 09:54:51 -0400
Received: from mail.valinux.co.jp ([210.128.90.3]:53055)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <yamahata@valinux.co.jp>) id 1Q6kF0-0001BF-5N
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 09:54:50 -0400
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 22:54:44 +0900
From: Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@valinux.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Register only one qbus_reset_all_fn() for
	system bus
Message-ID: <20110404135444.GM11748@valinux.co.jp>
References: <1298243333-23799-1-git-send-email-dbaryshkov@gmail.com>
	<20110401195746.GB24630@volta.aurel32.net>
	<20110402001203.GA11748@valinux.co.jp>
	<AANLkTiksYEWFqg5jRwcOxKrcHg6hCJkHL3i9fcJ1WSKF@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110403102639.GC11748@valinux.co.jp>
	<BANLkTi=nPG4RBKvUB=q7-oK0Ozh4f5zWoQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=nPG4RBKvUB=q7-oK0Ozh4f5zWoQ@mail.gmail.com>
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.nongnu.org/archive/html/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: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@gmail.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>

On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 03:58:39PM +0400, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
> On 4/3/11, Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@valinux.co.jp> wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 02, 2011 at 06:47:37PM +0400, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
> >> On 4/2/11, Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@valinux.co.jp> wrote:
> >> >> Have you verified that all bus devices have been qdevified since this
> >> >> code has been added? I wouldn't bet it is the case.
> >> >
> >> > I think his analysis is valid. So how about the following patch.
> >>
> >> Could you please point me to an example of devices for which this check is
> >> required.
> >
> > Although I don't have any example, I bet to not change the reset order.
> > If you check all the devices, it's good.
> 
> The question is which devices to check as lots of devices are already
> converted to qdev. Is it correct that we should check only devices
> which register a child bus with parent device set, and the thing that we
> should check is the fact that the parent reset function also causes
> the bus reset?

qbus whose parent is NULL, non-qdev devices and qdev devices which
uses qemu_register_reset() instead of DeviceInfo::reset.
-- 
yamahata