From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:34636)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1TkcV5-00038f-Nn
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 10:21:06 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1TkcV3-000801-9E
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 10:21:03 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:11345)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <mst@redhat.com>) id 1TkcV3-0007zw-1g
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 10:21:01 -0500
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 17:24:04 +0200
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20121217152404.GA28235@redhat.com>
References: <20121212153821.GA17446@redhat.com> <50C8B2FD.5030200@redhat.com>
	<20121212171847.GC18597@redhat.com> <50C8BF83.4010307@redhat.com>
	<20121212212720.GC23087@redhat.com> <50C997BF.80200@redhat.com>
	<20121216170418.GG15790@redhat.com> <50CE2184.9020908@redhat.com>
	<20121217104023.GC27072@redhat.com> <50CF36B8.4070203@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <50CF36B8.4070203@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] virtio: reset all qbuses too when
 writing to the status field
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: agraf@suse.de, qemu-devel <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 04:14:00PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 17/12/2012 11:40, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto:
> > How about the following? Then we can put reset
> > in generic code where it belongs.
> > It's untested - really kind of pseudo code - and
> > s390 is still to be updated.
> > 
> > Posting to see what does everyone thinks.
> 
> I'm not (yet) sure how that helps my problem,

It makes it possible for virtio.c to get at the
device state through the binding pointer.
So you will be able to qdev_reset_all from virtio.c
where it belongs, instead of duplicating code
in all bindings.

> but it is definitely a
> step in the right direction!
> 
> Paolo