Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] S390: Expose s390-specific CPU info

[Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com>]

On 02/08/2018 04:37 AM, Cornelia Huck wrote:

>>>> @@ -373,7 +373,7 @@ static void s390_machine_reset(void)
>>>>   
>>>>       /* all cpus are stopped - configure and start the ipl cpu only */
>>>>       s390_ipl_prepare_cpu(ipl_cpu);
>>>> -    s390_cpu_set_state(CPU_STATE_OPERATING, ipl_cpu);
>>>> +    s390_cpu_set_state(CPU_INFOS390_STATE_OPERATING, ipl_cpu);
>>>
>>> Exposing the state as a QAPI enum has the unfortunate side effect of
>>> that new name. It feels slightly awkward to me, as it is a state for
>>> real decisions and not just for info statements...
>>
>> I asked Viktor to use the qapi enum instead of having two sets of defines that
>> we need to keep in sync. (in fact 3, as the kernel kvm mpstate definition is also
>> there).
> 
> Agreed, using the QAPI enum makes sense.
> 
>>
>> But yes, the INFO in that name is somewhat strange. No good idea though.
> 
> Can we call the enum CpuS390State instead of CpuInfoS390State (while
> keeping the CpuInfoS390 name)? Or does that violate any QAPI rules?

The name of the enum is not important to introspection; and what's more, 
you can set the 'prefix':'...' key in QAPI to pick an enum naming in the 
C code that is saner than what the generator would automatically produce 
from the enum name itself (see qapi/crypto.json for some examples).

-- 
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc.           +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization:  qemu.org | libvirt.org