From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:59318)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1RbZCo-0003FO-Fq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:56:19 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1RbZCm-0005VE-IE
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:56:14 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:11718)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1RbZCm-0005V4-7c
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 09:56:12 -0500
Message-ID: <4EEB5C04.6070504@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 15:56:04 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1323721784-704-1-git-send-email-aliguori@us.ibm.com>	<4EEA3813.80006@us.ibm.com>	<4EEB1277.4070803@redhat.com>	<4EEB1ABB.50204@redhat.com>	<4EEB1F3B.8070302@redhat.com>
	<4EEB3891.2020003@redhat.com>	<4EEB4CD1.7050701@us.ibm.com>
	<4EEB5337.1060800@redhat.com> <4EEB5BB3.4030105@codemonkey.ws>
In-Reply-To: <4EEB5BB3.4030105@codemonkey.ws>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v3 00/20] qom: dynamic properties and
 composition tree
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>, Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>

On 12/16/2011 03:54 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
> Yes.  I'm not terribly sure how this would work yet.  A link and a child
> property both acquire references to a device and release a reference to
> a device at destruction time.
>
> For a child property, the reference held by the parent is the only
> reference in existing.  For non-child properties, the 'peripheral'
> container also holds a reference (since you want to be able to assign
> the device somewhere else in the device model).
>
> I'm not sure tying life cycles for a user created device makes sense.
> If a user creates a device, IMO, the user should be the one to destroy
> the device.

I agree.

Paolo