From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36332) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VE5Sn-0006mZ-UU for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 26 Aug 2013 18:40:54 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VE5Sf-0007TM-Cu for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 26 Aug 2013 18:40:45 -0400 Received: from mail-ea0-x22d.google.com ([2a00:1450:4013:c01::22d]:64891) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VE5Se-0007TH-Uy for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 26 Aug 2013 18:40:37 -0400 Received: by mail-ea0-f173.google.com with SMTP id g10so1908111eak.18 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2013 15:40:36 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <521BD95F.4030708@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 00:40:31 +0200 From: Paolo Bonzini MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1377471536-12423-1-git-send-email-akoskovacs@gmx.com> <1377471536-12423-22-git-send-email-akoskovacs@gmx.com> <521B316E.6070703@redhat.com> <521B8D3E.4080106@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <521B8D3E.4080106@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 21/47] hw/char/Kconfig: Add Kconfig file List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= Cc: =?UTF-8?B?w4Frb3MgS292w6Fjcw==?= , Alberto Garcia , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Il 26/08/2013 19:15, Andreas Färber ha scritto: >> > PCI devices are generally configurable, so you need to add prompts to them. > IndustryPack is really misplaced in hw/char/ and I believe I posted > patches to remedy that and let one actually find it in our source tree. > There were no objections against hw/ipack/, alternatively it could go > into hw/gpio/. (Currently my patch series is waiting to be respun due to > changed QOM realize requirements from Anthony.) > > That having being said, IndustryPack does not depend on PCI, only the > TPCI2000(?) PCI-IndustryPack bridge does. Both of them are under the same symbol right now. After all any of the two is basically unusable without the other, and plans for extension seem not to exist as even Linux has only that one bridge and one device. I have no objection to hw/ipack, but I have a question. Would you follow the SCSI/USB model (with devices under hw/ipack, also followed for IndustryPack in the Linux kernel) or the virtio model (where the device remains under hw/char)? Generally we've tried to follow Linux for hw/ structure unless maintainers preferred otherwise, so it would prefer the former. Paolo