From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=54204 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pn7LE-0004Rr-Dj
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Feb 2011 05:32:09 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1Pn7LD-0006a4-0s
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Feb 2011 05:32:08 -0500
Received: from mail-fx0-f45.google.com ([209.85.161.45]:60696)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <anthony@codemonkey.ws>) id 1Pn7LC-0006Zq-OQ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Feb 2011 05:32:06 -0500
Received: by fxm12 with SMTP id 12so11493fxm.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 09 Feb 2011 02:32:05 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4D526D0D.9020507@codemonkey.ws>
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 04:31:41 -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>	<4D51B1C9.3080507@codemonkey.ws>
	<m3r5bhhc0d.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
In-Reply-To: <m3r5bhhc0d.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 02/09/2011 02:01 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Anthony Liguori<anthony@codemonkey.ws>  writes:
>
>    
>> 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.
>>      
> Make it four: QEMUOptionParameter.
>
> Now let me make it three again.  Unlike the others, a qdev property
> describes a perfectly ordinary, non-variant struct member.  It's poor
> man's reflection, not a variant type.
>    

Except that construction of a device requires initialization from an 
array of variants (which is then type checked).  The way we store the 
variants is lossy because we convert back and forth to a string.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori