From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>,
Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>,
Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>,
Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>,
"Edgar E. Iglesias" <edgar.iglesias@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Plan for moving forward with QOM
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 17:23:30 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110915142329.GB11524@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E71FAD9.1000405@codemonkey.ws>
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 08:17:13AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> On 09/15/2011 01:31 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 01:04:00PM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> >>All device relationships are identified as named properties. A QOM
> >>path name
> >>consists of a named device, followed by a series of properties which
> >>may or may
> >>not refer to other devices. For instance, all of the following are
> >>valid paths:
> >>
> >> /i440fx/piix3/i8042/aux
> >> /i440fx/slot[1.0]/i8042/aux
> >> /i440fx/slot[1.0]/bus/piix3/i8042/aux
> >>
> >Have you looked at device paths generated by get_fw_dev_path() in qdev?
>
> get_fw_dev_path() won't exist in QOM. The fact that it exists in
> qdev is a problem with qdev.
>
I do not need get_fw_dev_path() as such. I need the way to generate OF
device path for a device. I hope you are not saying that the fact that
we generate OF path is the problem of qdev. OF device path is an ABI
between QEMU and a firmware. Firmware can't do much with QOM device
paths.
> >This function generates Open Firmware device path.
>
> The function generates *a* OF device path. OF is not a canonical
> representation of arbitrary hardware. It's a representation chosen
> (usually by a human) of what information about the hardware is
> needed by the OS-level software.
>
Of course it is chosen by human, just like QOM is the representation
chosen by human :) But human made sure that it presents enough information
for OS level software to unambiguously determine a device a path points
too.
> If you look at what other folks have done with OF integration in
> QEMU, you'll see a recurring theme of two OF trees, one used to
> create the hardware and the other that is actually exposed to the
> guest. The reason you need two is because guests sometimes expect
> very specific things that you really can't generate programmatically
> in every circumstance.
>
> >The difference
> >between OF device path and the examples above is that OF device path has
> >a meaning outside of QEMU and can be used by firmware to find a device
> >a path refers too. Will QOM be able to generate them?
>
> All of the information needed to generate an OF tree is available as
> device properties. To the extent that you need to knowledge of each
> bus to generate a OF path component, you'll need some extra
> knowledge of each bus to do that (just like with qdev today). But
> that knowledge will definitely not be part of QOM.
>
With qdev buses are different from devices so it is very clear where to
put that extra knowledge (inside get_fw_dev_path callback of a bus). How
are you going to do that with QOM? As you said in your other email QOM
is a graph, so dumb recursion will not work like it did in qdev. At each
node you need to know which link to take.
> Paths are not part of QOM. They're representations used by client
> software to navigate the QOM graph. There is no real need to make
> paths part of QOM explicitly.
>
I am not saying there is. I just what to make sure that we will not
regress by moving to QOM.
--
Gleb.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-15 14:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 88+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-09-14 18:04 [Qemu-devel] [RFC] Plan for moving forward with QOM Anthony Liguori
2011-09-14 18:49 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-14 19:30 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-09-14 19:42 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-14 21:15 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-09-14 22:11 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-15 13:43 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-09-15 14:11 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-15 16:38 ` Jan Kiszka
2011-09-15 18:01 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-16 10:12 ` Kevin Wolf
2011-09-16 13:00 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-14 20:00 ` Edgar E. Iglesias
2011-09-14 20:22 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-14 20:27 ` Edgar E. Iglesias
2011-09-14 20:37 ` Blue Swirl
2011-09-14 21:25 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-15 6:31 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-09-15 10:49 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2011-09-15 13:08 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-15 13:17 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-15 14:23 ` Gleb Natapov [this message]
2011-09-16 14:46 ` John Williams
2011-09-16 16:10 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-17 1:11 ` Edgar E. Iglesias
2011-09-17 2:12 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-17 2:35 ` Edgar E. Iglesias
2011-09-15 13:57 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-15 14:14 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-09-15 14:25 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-09-15 15:28 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-15 15:38 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-09-15 16:33 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-15 16:59 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-09-15 17:51 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-15 20:29 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-09-15 20:45 ` Peter Maydell
2011-09-15 21:15 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-16 16:33 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-09-16 17:47 ` Peter Maydell
2011-09-16 18:08 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-16 18:22 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-09-16 18:42 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-16 19:13 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-09-16 19:29 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-16 20:48 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-09-16 21:03 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-17 0:01 ` Edgar E. Iglesias
2011-09-16 18:18 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-09-15 20:50 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-16 16:47 ` Gleb Natapov
2011-09-17 0:48 ` Edgar E. Iglesias
2011-09-17 2:17 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-17 2:29 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-17 2:41 ` Edgar E. Iglesias
2011-09-15 6:47 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-09-15 13:26 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-15 13:35 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-09-15 13:54 ` Peter Maydell
2011-09-15 14:18 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-15 14:33 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-09-15 14:48 ` Peter Maydell
2011-09-15 15:31 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-15 15:47 ` Paolo Bonzini
2011-09-15 20:23 ` Avi Kivity
2011-09-15 20:52 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-09-18 7:56 ` Avi Kivity
2011-09-18 14:00 ` Avi Kivity
2011-09-16 9:36 ` Gerd Hoffmann
2011-12-13 4:47 ` Paul Brook
2011-12-13 13:22 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-12-13 17:40 ` Paul Brook
2011-12-13 18:00 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-12-13 20:36 ` Paul Brook
2011-12-13 21:53 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-12-14 0:39 ` Paul Brook
2011-12-14 13:53 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-12-14 14:01 ` Avi Kivity
2011-12-14 14:11 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-12-14 14:35 ` Avi Kivity
2011-12-14 14:46 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-12-14 14:50 ` Avi Kivity
2011-12-15 18:59 ` Paul Brook
2011-12-15 19:12 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-12-15 21:28 ` Paul Brook
2011-12-16 2:08 ` Anthony Liguori
2011-12-16 5:11 ` Paul Brook
2011-12-14 9:11 ` Andreas Färber
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110915142329.GB11524@redhat.com \
--to=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=edgar.iglesias@gmail.com \
--cc=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
--cc=kraxel@redhat.com \
--cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).