From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=44424 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pmusg-0000HG-7K
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 08 Feb 2011 16:13:51 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1Pmure-00022g-AL
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 08 Feb 2011 16:13:39 -0500
Received: from mail-ww0-f41.google.com ([74.125.82.41]:49301)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1Pmure-00022a-4j
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 08 Feb 2011 16:12:46 -0500
Received: by wwi18 with SMTP id 18so1032265wwi.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 08 Feb 2011 13:12:45 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4D51B1C9.3080507@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 15:12:41 -0600
From: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call minutes for Feb 8
References: <20110208155557.GM6198@x200.localdomain>
	<m3k4hasb3i.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
In-Reply-To: <m3k4hasb3i.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
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.nongnu.org/archive/html/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: Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>
Cc: Chris Wright <chrisw@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org

On 02/08/2011 11:13 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Chris Wright<chrisw@redhat.com>  writes:
>
> [...]
>    
>> - qdev/vmstate both examples of partially completed work that need more
>>    attention
>>      
> As far as qdev's concerned, I can see two kinds of to-dos:
>
> * Further develop qdev so that more of the machine init code can becomes
>    qdev declarations.  Specific ideas welcome.  Patches even more, as
>    always.
>    

I think we need to improve the i440fx modelling as a lot of the stuff 
done in the machine init for pc really belongs as part of the i440fx.

In theory, creating an i440fx ought to be essentially equivalent to the 
machine init function today.

> * Convert the remaining devices.  They are typically used only with
>    oddball machines, which makes the conversion hard to test for anyone
>    who's not already using them.
>
>    I've said this before: at some point in time (sooner rather than
>    later, if you ask me), we need to shoot the stragglers.  I'm pretty
>    optimistic that any victims worth keeping will receive timely
>    attention then.
>
> Anything else?
>    

We need to unify the property model.  We have QemuOpts, qdev properties, 
and QObject which basically reinvents variant typing three different ways.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori