On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Markus Armbruster<address@hidden> wrote:
Blue Swirl<address@hidden> writes:
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Markus Armbruster<address@hidden> wrote:
Anthony Liguori<address@hidden> writes:
On 02/12/2011 11:03 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
Blue Swirl<address@hidden> writes:
Convert to qdev, also add a proper reset function.
[...]
Pointer properties are for dirty hacks only. Is there really no better
solution? Why does it have to be a property?
vmmouse is really just an extension to the PS2 Mouse. It's definitely
not an ISA device.
In terms of qdev enablement, I would just make it a boolean option to
the PS2Mouse and not expose it as a top level device at all. It
cannot exist without a PS2Mouse.
Which means making it a separate qdev is wrong. That wrongness gave
rise to the dirty pointer property. Pointer property serves as canary
again.
What now?
I don't find pointer property use so dirty,
See commit 036f7166.
but I'll try to combine
the devices to see whether that makes sense.
Appreciated.
The attached patch would merge the devices, but I'm not so sure this
is the right approach. Merging seems to be OK, the registration could
be removed harder by adding a switch for known vmport values.
But vmmouse couldn't be left out of the build anymore since it would
be built per target (because of CPUState dependencies). That would be
a step backwards. Perhaps the register access helpers should be pushed
to board level.