From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=35322 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PANO3-0008Fh-49 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 09:46:57 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PANNz-0007C7-L6 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 09:46:52 -0400 Received: from mail-qw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.216.45]:52065) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PANNz-0007C2-HW for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 09:46:51 -0400 Received: by qwf7 with SMTP id 7so1519725qwf.4 for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2010 06:46:51 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4CC58A48.6070204@codemonkey.ws> Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 08:46:48 -0500 From: Anthony Liguori MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/2] Type-safe ioport callbacks References: <1287934469-16624-1-git-send-email-avi@redhat.com> <4CC46E73.2090704@redhat.com> <4CC46F22.7070202@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4CC46F22.7070202@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Avi Kivity Cc: Paolo Bonzini , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org On 10/24/2010 12:38 PM, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 10/24/2010 07:35 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> On 10/24/2010 05:34 PM, Avi Kivity wrote: >>> A recent qemu -> qemu-kvm merge broke cpu hotplug without the compiler >>> complaining because of the type-unsafeness of the ioport callbacks. >>> This >>> patchset adds a type-safe variant of ioport callbacks and coverts a >>> sample >>> ioport. Converting the other 300-odd registrations is left as an >>> excercise >>> to the community. >> >> Should we create a Documentation/ file with incomplete transitions >> and the commit(s) that introduced them, for volunteers who wish to do >> some dirty work or to learn Coccinelle? > > If we have a TODO, we could add a janitor section there. That's unnecessary work. The vast majority of the callers of register_ioport* should be using a bus specific interface instead. Regards, Anthony Liguori