From: "Andreas Färber" <afaerber@suse.de>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH qom-next 1/7] qdev: Push state up to Object
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 23:43:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FD66678.9090702@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FD663B2.3020904@suse.de>
Am 11.06.2012 23:31, schrieb Andreas Färber:
> Am 11.06.2012 15:21, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
>> On 06/11/2012 03:25 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote:
>>> Am 10.06.2012 19:38, schrieb Andreas Färber:
>>>> Am 10.06.2012 17:49, schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
>>>>> Il 08/06/2012 03:19, Anthony Liguori ha scritto:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +typedef enum ObjectState {
>>>>>>> + OBJECT_STATE_INITIALIZED = 1,
>>>>>>> + OBJECT_STATE_REALIZED,
>>>>>>> +} ObjectState;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think using a bool would be better since it reduces the
>>>>>> temptation to
>>>>>> add additional states.
>>>>>
>>>>> In fact someone already discussed having a third state for block
>>>>> devices... :)
>>>>
>>>> I would expect that file_opened state to remain internal to the block
>>>> layer. Thought we discussed that on IRC?
>>>
>>> I think I still don't understand well enough what 'realized' is really
>>> supposed to mean.
>>
>> realized is essentially the Vcc pin for the device.
>>
>> When realized = true, it means power has been applied to the device (and
>> the guest potentially is interacting with it).
>>
>> When realized = false, it means that power is not applied to the device
>> and the guest is not running.
>
> That does not match my understanding of realize.
>
> To me, realize is the second-stage (final) initialization of an object.
> It's purpose is to set up an object based on properties set after its
> initialization, so that it can be fully used.
> Contrary to the initialization phase, where failure would lead to
> inability to run finalizers, realization can fail and leaves the object
> in a defined state so that it can either be realized again with changed
> properties or deleted, running any finalizers.
>
> The main difference to qdev init is that we are working towards
> replacing the init-after-create pattern with late, central realization
> so that users have a chance to modify objects through QMP once
> initialized. (Which is what the don't-create-objects-in-realize and
> in-place initialization discussion is about.)
This is the part that I think can be interpreted as "machine is powered
on" or Vcc, but there's nothing stopping us from calling realize at a
slightly different point in time for non-device objects not connected to
/machine.
An SD card for instance could be realized before it is inserted into the
drive and thereby before it gets any Vcc.
/-F
> Thus I do not think this has anything to do with devices or power. A
> device within a SoC or Super I/O chip that is turned off / powered down
> may still be there wrt MemoryRegions. It would be possible though to
> amend realize functionality by overriding realize for DeviceState or
> specific devices.
>
> For block devices I thought the discussion had been that they would get
> a block-specific open(Error**) method, called after initialization and
> setting the file name / URL, setting some bool opened state. Some block
> properties would then depend on "opened" rather than on
> object_is_realized() and fail otherwise. Realize would still be the
> final construction of the object based on user-settable properties.
>
> A variation of this patch here would be to introduce bool realized while
> leaving the qdev state untouched. But that would be in the way of
> generalizing static properties to Object, which would mean for the block
> layer that any trivial property would need to be implemented through
> manually coded getters and setters.
>
> Regards,
> Andreas
--
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-11 21:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-07 19:30 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH qom-next 0/7] QOM realize, revised Andreas Färber
2012-06-07 19:30 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH qom-next 1/7] qdev: Push state up to Object Andreas Färber
2012-06-08 1:19 ` Anthony Liguori
2012-06-10 15:49 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-06-10 17:35 ` Anthony Liguori
2012-06-10 17:38 ` Andreas Färber
2012-06-11 8:25 ` Kevin Wolf
2012-06-11 13:21 ` Anthony Liguori
2012-06-11 14:38 ` Kevin Wolf
2012-06-11 21:31 ` Andreas Färber
2012-06-11 21:43 ` Andreas Färber [this message]
2012-06-11 21:48 ` Anthony Liguori
2012-06-12 0:14 ` Andreas Färber
2012-06-07 19:31 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH qom-next 2/7] qom: Add get_id Andreas Färber
2012-06-08 1:22 ` Anthony Liguori
2012-06-08 7:11 ` Andreas Färber
2012-06-08 7:44 ` Anthony Liguori
2012-06-08 8:17 ` Andreas Färber
2012-06-08 10:59 ` [Qemu-devel] [libvirt] " Daniel P. Berrange
2012-06-08 11:58 ` [Qemu-devel] " Eric Blake
2012-06-07 19:31 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH qom-next 3/7] qdev: Generalize properties to Objects Andreas Färber
2012-06-08 1:23 ` Anthony Liguori
2012-06-07 19:31 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH qom-next 4/7] qdev: Move bulk of qdev-properties.c to qom/object-properties.c Andreas Färber
2012-06-07 23:23 ` Paolo Bonzini
2012-06-08 1:26 ` Anthony Liguori
2012-06-07 19:31 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH qom-next 5/7] qom: Push static properties to Object Andreas Färber
2012-06-08 1:26 ` Anthony Liguori
2012-06-07 19:31 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH qom-next 6/7] qom: Add "realized" property Andreas Färber
2012-06-08 1:26 ` Anthony Liguori
2012-06-07 19:31 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH qom-next 7/7] qom: Add QERR_PROPERTY_SET_AFTER_REALIZE Andreas Färber
2012-06-07 19:56 ` Andreas Färber
2012-06-07 23:22 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH qom-next 0/7] QOM realize, revised Paolo Bonzini
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4FD66678.9090702@suse.de \
--to=afaerber@suse.de \
--cc=anthony@codemonkey.ws \
--cc=armbru@redhat.com \
--cc=kwolf@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).