qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL 07/15] q35: Check propery to determine if iommu i


From: Marcel Apfelbaum
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PULL 07/15] q35: Check propery to determine if iommu is set
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 13:38:51 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.1.0

On 11/29/2015 08:22 PM, Bandan Das wrote:
Hi Marcel,

Marcel Apfelbaum <address@hidden> writes:
...

Maybe is too late, but this contradicts QEMU usage, as I understand
Why late ? We can always revert it :)

Well, this is why I am so disappointment in myself that I didn't catch
this earlier. I *really* don't like doing this. :(

On the bright side this is a 're-factoring only' patch, so we can
take our time with it.


object_property_get_* should be used when we don't know object's type.
My understanding is that it's not mandatory to use it only when type
is unknown. Ofcourse, it makes it redundant when you do know the type.

I tend to follow convention, I noticed another call to qdev_get_machine,
and so opted for this. I am actually ok either way and don't prefer one way
over the other.

This part actually makes sense. qdev_get_machine should be preferred over
current_machine global variable that should disappear (IMHO).

But once we have the machine as Object, we can simply cast it to machine
and get the field with MACHINE(qdev_get_machine())->iommu instead of
calling the property 'by name'.

And the wrapper machine_iommu was a "commodity method" requested by (some)
QOM guys who don't like calling the "object internals" in other files.

However since "iommmu" is a simple flag, I suppose we gain nothing from the 
wrapper.


Thanks,
Marcel


Why use "iommu" when you can simply call current_machine->iommu ?
(if you don't like the wrapper, which is pretty harmless in my opinion)


Thanks,
Marcel

           mch_init_dmar(mch);
       }
   }





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]