From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Mjc5l-0006Q4-Ug
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2009 12:56:53 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1Mjc5g-0006Mj-8u
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2009 12:56:53 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37213 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Mjc5g-0006MX-5I
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2009 12:56:48 -0400
Received: from mail-ew0-f223.google.com ([209.85.219.223]:56786)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <blauwirbel@gmail.com>) id 1MjbvM-0004IU-MY
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 04 Sep 2009 12:46:10 -0400
Received: by ewy23 with SMTP id 23so982489ewy.8
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Fri, 04 Sep 2009 09:46:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20090904164030.GA31240@amit-x200.redhat.com>
References: <1252055670-26958-1-git-send-email-amit.shah@redhat.com>
	<f43fc5580909040926v29e7f6c1k68c8accd7dd431f@mail.gmail.com>
	<20090904163306.GA31086@amit-x200.redhat.com>
	<f43fc5580909040937o64fba67fy13fc21473a5cec8@mail.gmail.com>
	<20090904164030.GA31240@amit-x200.redhat.com>
From: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2009 19:45:41 +0300
Message-ID: <f43fc5580909040945i47b81b11raba9cf8e9951a148@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] virtio-console: Have a static instance of
	virtconsole
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
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.gnu.org/pipermail/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: Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Amit Shah<amit.shah@redhat.com> wrote:
> On (Fri) Sep 04 2009 [19:37:25], Blue Swirl wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Amit Shah<amit.shah@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > On (Fri) Sep 04 2009 [19:26:27], Blue Swirl wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Amit Shah<amit.shah@redhat.com> wrote:
>> >> > Currently the VirtIOConsole struct is allocated from the call
>> >> > to virtio_common_init, also doing an UP_CAST implicitly.
>> >> >
>> >> > The new multiport functionality will need a few arrays and
>> >> > it's easier to move to the new VMState infrastructure by
>> >> > keeping it all within one struct.
>> >>
>> >> > +VirtIOConsole virtconsole;
>> >>
>> >> IMHO this is going to wrong direction. What kind of code would need a
>> >> static instance?
>> >
>> > Adding multiple ports to the console device, we'll have to store an
>> > array of ports here as well as config space. Both of these are
>> > device-specific.
>>
>> There could be a master device which managed all ports.
>
> There's only one instance of a virtio device created, and this device
> hosts multiple ports. And VirIOConsole is the master structure.

But instead of this, you should have a separate structure for the
master one, if that way you can avoid the static instance.