From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1O47u5-00047T-Ub
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 03:29:54 -0400
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=32987 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O47tS-00043R-DO
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 03:29:53 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <kraxel@redhat.com>) id 1O47sl-0002CQ-GL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 03:29:10 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:10140)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <kraxel@redhat.com>) id 1O47sl-0002Bh-3f
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 20 Apr 2010 03:28:31 -0400
Message-ID: <4BCD5796.1030502@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 09:28:22 +0200
From: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] Write cmos hd data for ide drives	 using
	-device parm
References: <4BC482850200004800092E82@sinclair.provo.novell.com>
	<4BC56D9A.7010606@redhat.com>
	<4BCC63030200004800093962@sinclair.provo.novell.com>
In-Reply-To: <4BCC63030200004800093962@sinclair.provo.novell.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Bruce Rogers <brogers@novell.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

   Hi,

> Not much traffic on this thread ;-)

Indeed ;)

> I can see the usefulness of an init_late() to generalize post device setup issues.
> I assume then that you didn't have any other issues with my patch, other than general code structure concerns?

Yes, that is the major one.  I think it is much saner to just have a 
init_late() and collect everything there instead of creating a new hook 
each time you figure you need one.

I think this also allows to make the ide changes less intrusive as all 
the cmos setup logic stays local to pc.c.  pc.c can simply keep a 
pointer to the DeviceState structs of the ide interface(s) created in 
pc_init1().  pc_init_late() then can check which drives are plugged in 
and update cmos accordingly.

cheers,
   Gerd