From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KQ4Nb-0006do-QF for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:01:59 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KQ4NY-0006d2-7B for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:01:59 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=41596 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KQ4NY-0006cv-2b for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:01:56 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:41946) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KQ4NW-0003Zy-7q for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2008 14:01:54 -0400 Message-ID: <48974401.5040502@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 20:01:37 +0200 From: Gerd Hoffmann MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/7] xen: groundwork for xen support References: <1217865045-10722-1-git-send-email-kraxel@redhat.com> <1217865045-10722-2-git-send-email-kraxel@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Blue Swirl Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org Blue Swirl wrote: > On 8/4/08, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: >> - allow xenpv machines run without disk and kernel specified >> by adding a nodisk_ok field to QEMUMachine. > > Nice idea, this would be a useful feature by itself. Yes, some embedded devices probably can use that too according to the source code comment. Guess thats why anthony suggested to do it that way, and I liked the idea too, so I just did ;) >> + $(XEN_OBJS) : CFLAGS += -Wall -Wmissing-prototypes -Wstrict-prototypes > > These aren't needed for Xen. Though I wonder why at least -Wall > -Wstrict-prototypes could not be added globally. IIRC I tried to turn them on globally and found myself swamped with warnings. So I took the easy way out and enabled them only for the xen bits I'm working on. I like those warnings, they catch sloppyness and help writing clean code. They are in no way required though. We can add them globally nevertheless, I can keep them as local patch, I don't mind much. >> + if (-1 != xen_present) > > This style looks alien to me. Do you really find it readable? Bad habit. gcc warns these days on "if (foo = 42)", so the reason to write "if (42 = foo)" is gone. I'm still doing that for -- say -- historical reasons? cheers, Gerd -- http://kraxel.fedorapeople.org/xenner/