From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:32828) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fftNp-0007rn-Lo for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:49:14 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fftNl-0000fC-2b for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:49:13 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-x544.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::544]:44668) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fftNk-0000eh-QD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:49:08 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-x544.google.com with SMTP id f23-v6so5352105edr.11 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 13:49:08 -0700 (PDT) References: <20180709091136.28849-1-e.emanuelegiuseppe@gmail.com> <20180709091136.28849-3-e.emanuelegiuseppe@gmail.com> <20180711144920.GN31228@stefanha-x1.localdomain> <494e6b18-a5e9-0521-4ace-dca2160ea191@redhat.com> <20180718142927.GN21825@stefanha-x1.localdomain> <2d822611-d227-1e9e-bfb4-d119f78a0282@gmail.com> <645dd61a-b309-4a54-3e59-2dce23244045@redhat.com> From: Emanuele Message-ID: <928e71ec-1a1d-ed63-310b-83910e10e51f@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 22:49:05 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <645dd61a-b309-4a54-3e59-2dce23244045@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/7] tests/qgraph: pci-pc driver and interface nodes List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi , Laurent Vivier , =?UTF-8?Q?Philippe_Mathieu-Daud=c3=a9?= , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 07/18/2018 09:33 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 18/07/2018 20:29, Emanuele wrote: >> I had to put this patch here because it also introduces >> qpci_device_init, used by sdhci (patch 3). >> >> For the next version I plan to have a patch X where I rename all >> occurrences of qpci_init_pc in qpci_pc_new, and a patch X+1 that >> introduces qpci_init_pc (was qpci_set_pc) and the other changes. >> >> Should I only introduce qpci_device_init in patch 3 and the remaining >> things in patch 5? >> >> I think the general problem here is that in some patches I create >> functions that are planned to only be used only in next patches (of the >> current series). > I think it's okay this way, however you should justify the changes you > make to "qgraph-ify" each component. > > For patch 1, let's wait for Stefan's reply. Because patch 1 is > introducing the infrastructure, I think it is acceptable that some > definitions are introduced early as long as they have doc comments; it > would make little sense to introduce get_device in patch 4 just because > there are no "contains" edges until then. > > However, introducing the qos-test directly at the beginning is also a > possibility. > > In either case, we need better doc comments for the function pointers in > QOSGraphObject. What would you suggest as better doc comments? For version 2 I have written a little introduction like in qom/object.h, essentially pasting the cover letter and a working example. > Paolo