From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=45708 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q6iQf-0001gD-Bw
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 07:58:46 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dbaryshkov@gmail.com>) id 1Q6iQc-00024I-9j
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 07:58:43 -0400
Received: from mail-vw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.212.45]:36454)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <dbaryshkov@gmail.com>) id 1Q6iQc-00023N-7J
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 07:58:42 -0400
Received: by vws17 with SMTP id 17so4681323vws.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Mon, 04 Apr 2011 04:58:40 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20110403102639.GC11748@valinux.co.jp>
References: <1298243333-23799-1-git-send-email-dbaryshkov@gmail.com>
	<20110401195746.GB24630@volta.aurel32.net>
	<20110402001203.GA11748@valinux.co.jp>
	<AANLkTiksYEWFqg5jRwcOxKrcHg6hCJkHL3i9fcJ1WSKF@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110403102639.GC11748@valinux.co.jp>
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 15:58:39 +0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=nPG4RBKvUB=q7-oK0Ozh4f5zWoQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Register only one qbus_reset_all_fn() for
	system bus
From: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/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: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@valinux.co.jp>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net>

On 4/3/11, Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@valinux.co.jp> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 02, 2011 at 06:47:37PM +0400, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
>> On 4/2/11, Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@valinux.co.jp> wrote:
>> >> Have you verified that all bus devices have been qdevified since this
>> >> code has been added? I wouldn't bet it is the case.
>> >
>> > I think his analysis is valid. So how about the following patch.
>>
>> Could you please point me to an example of devices for which this check is
>> required.
>
> Although I don't have any example, I bet to not change the reset order.
> If you check all the devices, it's good.

The question is which devices to check as lots of devices are already
converted to qdev. Is it correct that we should check only devices
which register a child bus with parent device set, and the thing that we
should check is the fact that the parent reset function also causes
the bus reset?

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry