Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] arm boot: added QOM device definition

[Peter Maydell]

On 8 February 2012 13:47, Anthony Liguori <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 02/08/2012 06:41 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> Yeah, basically the variable flow goes:
>>
>>   vl.c ->  machine_opts ->  machine_init() ->  device properties ->
>>  device_init()
>
> And the rationale is that machine_init() will do nothing other than use QOM
> primitives to create a set of expected devices and set up their properties
> such that a person (or management tool) could do everything that
> machine_init() is doing.

So I think this flow is wrong (and indeed I didn't implement it that way in
my patches to add machine opts for kernel/initrd/dtb) -- the machine_init()
shouldn't have to care about this because we don't want to have to modify
a huge set of machine init functions every time we add an extra option
that only the boot loader cares about.

I don't particularly care how we QOMify arm_boot (it's not exactly at
the top of my priority list demanding attention), I do care that (a)
we have a sensible user-facing interface [ie command line options] and
(b) vl.c can usefully just pass the information from those options
straight to the boot loader code.

-- PMM