From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58199) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5Xm7-0006WL-Jn for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 07:14:28 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5Xm2-0006Pn-Km for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 07:14:27 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:35573) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z5Xm2-0006P7-FP for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 18 Jun 2015 07:14:22 -0400 Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2015 13:14:18 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20150618131338-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> References: <1434620035-10808-1-git-send-email-kraxel@redhat.com> <1434620035-10808-2-git-send-email-kraxel@redhat.com> <20150618113745-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL 1/1] virtio-input: evdev passthrough List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Gerd Hoffmann , QEMU Developers On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 12:11:47PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 18 June 2015 at 10:39, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2015 at 11:33:55AM +0200, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > >> +static Property virtio_input_host_pci_properties[] = { > >> + DEFINE_VIRTIO_INPUT_PROPERTIES(VirtIOInputPCI, vdev.input), > >> + DEFINE_PROP_STRING("evdev", VirtIOInputHostPCI, vdev.evdev), > >> + DEFINE_PROP_UINT32("vectors", VirtIOPCIProxy, nvectors, 2), > >> + DEFINE_PROP_END_OF_LIST(), > >> +}; > >> + > > > > Hmm I only noticed this now: I think properties > > should all move into virtio input, there is > > no reason to make them pci specific. > > 'vectors' is probably pci specific, but evdev isn't. Not really - some other transports have them too, so we made it a generic virtio concept. > > Since you already added some properties, it's ok > > to apply this but please fix this with a patch on top. > > Shuffling properties around later while trying to maintain > backcompat is painful, so I think we're better off just > making sure we have them in the right places to start with. > > I'm dropping this pullreq from my queue. > > thanks > -- PMM