From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34596)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1X2FsH-0008Vf-NZ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 04:26:49 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pbonzini@redhat.com>) id 1X2FsA-0001eb-7s
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 04:26:41 -0400
Message-ID: <53B3C21D.5040203@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 10:26:05 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1404251378-5242-1-git-send-email-agraf@suse.de>	<1404251378-5242-4-git-send-email-agraf@suse.de>
	<CAEgOgz7WYPr=xqJo8HJ711H1oX3H_v2J_5MQ0-jxAx2jJ0MC-g@mail.gmail.com>
	<53B3C1A8.7020408@suse.de>
In-Reply-To: <53B3C1A8.7020408@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/6] sysbus: Add user map hints
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: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>, Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com>
Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, Eric Auger <eric.auger@linaro.org>, "qemu-devel@nongnu.org Developers" <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, qemu-ppc Mailing List <qemu-ppc@nongnu.org>, "Stalley,
	Sean" <sean.stalley@intel.com>, =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= <afaerber@suse.de>

Il 02/07/2014 10:24, Alexander Graf ha scritto:
>>>
>> So this suggests your reasoning for side effected _ptr write is just
>> for validity checking. So another approach could be to add a "check"
>> function to the _ptr variants (rather than an open coded) setter. This
>> has the advantage of being consistent with what we already do for
>> object_property_add_link.
>
> Heh, yes. Unfortunately "realized" is a field in DeviceStruct which we
> don't have access to from object.c.
>
> In fact, this is exactly what I wanted to do before this approach. I
> introduced an enum that was either
>
>   * read-only
>   * read-write
>   * read-write-before-realize
>
> and wanted to do all the checking in object.c.
>
> But then I realized that object.c really shouldn't be aware of
> DeviceState and threw away the idea.

I think your solution is pretty.  However, it's probably time to split 
qom/object.c and/or include/qom/object.h.

Paolo