Re: [PATCH v2] hw/s390x: Attach the sclpconsole to /machine/sclp/s390-sclp-event-facility

[Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>]

On 02/05/2024 09.57, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
> On 4/30/24 21:08, Thomas Huth wrote:
>> The sclpconsole currently does not have a proper parent in the QOM
>> tree, so it shows up under /machine/unattached - which is somewhat
>> ugly. We should rather attach it to /machine/sclp/s390-sclp-event-facility
>> where the other devices of type TYPE_SCLP_EVENT already reside.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Huth <thuth@redhat.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Cédric Le Goater <clg@redhat.com>
> 
>> ---
>>   hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 4 +++-
>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
>> index 5c83d1ea17..41be8bf857 100644
>> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
>> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c
>> @@ -242,11 +242,13 @@ static void s390_create_virtio_net(BusState *bus, 
>> const char *name)
>>   static void s390_create_sclpconsole(const char *type, Chardev *chardev)
>>   {
>> +    BusState *ev_fac_bus = sclp_get_event_facility_bus();
> 
> This routine sclp_get_event_facility_bus() which scans all the machine
> could be avoided and even removed. For that, SCLPDevice should be an
> attribute of the machine. This means reshuffling definitions and
> object instanciations a little in the code. Would you be OK with that ?

Sounds like a good clean-up, yes!

  Thomas