From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44592) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YVNXt-0002VS-F7 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 13:02:18 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YVNXp-0001Rj-3q for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 13:02:17 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:50255 helo=mx2.suse.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YVNXo-0001Ra-Ur for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2015 13:02:13 -0400 Message-ID: <54FF2393.5090009@suse.de> Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 18:02:11 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1424983069-14080-1-git-send-email-ehabkost@redhat.com> <54F081E6.1050209@suse.de> In-Reply-To: <54F081E6.1050209@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/4] cpu: Make cpu_init() return QOM object List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eduardo Habkost Cc: Blue Swirl , Riku Voipio , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Am 27.02.2015 um 15:40 schrieb Andreas F=E4rber: > Hi Eduardo, >=20 > Am 26.02.2015 um 21:37 schrieb Eduardo Habkost: >> This series changes cpu_init() to return a CPU QOM object, and changes= existing >> arch-specific code to use the corresponding arch-specific function ins= tead of >> cpu_init(). >> >> With this, the only remaining users of cpu_init() are linux-user and b= sd-user. >> >> Eduardo Habkost (4): >> target-unicore32: Make uc32_cpu_init() return UniCore32CPU >> m68k: Use cpu_m68k_init() >> unicore32: Use uc32_cpu_init() >=20 > This part looks good to me. At the time, I propagated *CPU only for > those machines that needed it for function calls or field accesses. >=20 >> cpu: Make cpu_init() return QOM object >=20 > As for this patch, the Coccinelle based approach looks cool! However I > would like to give this a bit more thought as to whether 1) this causes > churn with regards to the next steps I outlined, and 2) whether more > simplifications can be done while at it. Could be done as follow-ups. Not hearing any objection from machine maintainers, I've gone ahead and applied the fourth patch as well: https://github.com/afaerber/qemu-cpu/commits/qom-cpu One of the concerns I had was whether we might use cpu_generic_init() in the macro directly, where applicable. But that seems to depend on whether machines will continue to use FooCPU *cpu_foo_init(), which depends on how we proceed with CPU (hot-plug) remodeling, etc. Thanks, Andreas >=20 > Let's also keep in mind that target-tilegx patches are on the list. >=20 > Regards, > Andreas --=20 SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 N=FCrnberg, Germany GF: Felix Imend=F6rffer, Jane Smithard, Jennifer Guild, Dilip Upmanyu, Graham Norton; HRB 21284 (AG N=FCrnberg)