Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for Tuesday 7

[Paolo Bonzini]

On 02/07/2012 03:56 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> > Another related question is, should the 4th QOM series present a full
> > composition tree based on the legacy qdev bus concept?
>
> Composition, no. The legacy qbus concept doesn't model composition
> because it puts children created by composition (like the Cirrus VGA
> adapter) in the same context as a device created by a user (like an
> e1000 network card).
>
> > Currently it doesn't, but
> > if not, why not? That would help _a lot_ with removing PROP_PTR.
>
> One thing that we could do, is modify qdev_create() like:
>
> DeviceState *qdev_create_with_name(BusState *bus, const char *typename,
> const char *name)
> {
> // ...
> object_property_add_child(legacy_machine_root(), name, OBJECT(dev), &err);
> // assert if err due to conflicting property names
> }
>
> DeviceState *qdev_create(BusState *bus, const char *typename)
> {
> return qdev_create_with_name(bus, typename, typename);
> }
>
> Most devices only have a single instance.   In the cases where there are
> multiple instances, we'll have to fix it up manually but that really
> shouldn't be all that hard.

I'm wary of all plans that require to go through all the code once. 
What about simply /devices/default/child[...] or something like that?

BTW, I would like to change /i440fx to /devices/i440fx, so that we will 
have clean namespaces:

/block
    ...
/chardev
    ...
/clocks
    ...
/devices
    /peripheral
        ...                 # named devices created with -device
    /peripheral-anon
        /child[...]         # unnamed devices created with -device
    /default
        /child[...]         # created with qdev_create

Paolo