Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] qdev: Introduce DEFINE_PROP_RESERVED_REGION

[Auger Eric <eric.auger@redhat.com>]

Hi Markus,

On 6/23/20 5:15 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> Auger Eric <eric.auger@redhat.com> writes:
> 
>> Hi Markus,
>>
>> On 6/22/20 1:22 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>>> Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Introduce a new property defining a reserved region:
>>>> <low address>, <high address>, <type>.
> [...]
>>> I dimly remember discussing the wisdom of numeric type here, dig, dig,
>>> ..., aha:
>>>
>>>     Subject: Re: [PATCH for-5.0 v11 12/20] qapi: Introduce DEFINE_PROP_INTERVAL
>>>     Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2019 11:03:02 +0100
>>>     Message-ID: <87y2vg4k6h.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org>
>>>
>>>     >> So the "label" part of "<low address>,<high address>,label" is a number?
>>>     > yes it is.
>>>     >> 
>>>     >> Is a number appropriate for your use case, or would an enum be better?
>>>     > I think a number is OK. There might be other types of reserved regions
>>>     > in the future. Also if we want to allow somebody else to reuse that
>>>     > property in another context, I would rather leave it open?
>>>
>>>     I'd prioritize the user interface over possible reuse (which might never
>>>     happen).  Mind, I'm not telling you using numbers is a bad user
>>>     interface.  In general, enums are nicer, but I don't know enough about
>>>     this particular case.
>> Yep I remember too ;-) I left as it was because I think this property
>> could be used for other use cases.
> 
> YAGNI :)
> 
> A string would work, too, wouldn't it?
:-)

Eric
> 
> [...]
> 
>