Hello Daniel,
On 10/19/23 11:09, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:34:52AM -0500, Ninad Palsule wrote:
Hello Daniel,
On 10/19/23 03:14, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 10:13:30AM -0500, Ninad Palsule wrote:
This is a part of patchset where IBM's Flexible Service Interface is
introduced.
The LBUS is modelled to maintain the qdev bus hierarchy and to take
advantage of the object model to automatically generate the CFAM
configuration block. The configuration block presents engines in the
order they are attached to the CFAM's LBUS. Engine implementations
should subclass the LBusDevice and set the 'config' member of
LBusDeviceClass to match the engine's type.
Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <and...@aj.id.au>
Signed-off-by: Cédric Le Goater <c...@kaod.org>
Signed-off-by: Ninad Palsule <ni...@linux.ibm.com>
---
v2:
- Incorporated Joel's review comments.
v5:
- Incorporated review comments by Cedric.
---
include/hw/fsi/lbus.h | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/qemu/bitops.h | 6 +++
hw/fsi/lbus.c | 87 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
hw/Kconfig | 1 +
hw/fsi/Kconfig | 2 +
hw/fsi/meson.build | 1 +
hw/meson.build | 1 +
7 files changed, 149 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 include/hw/fsi/lbus.h
create mode 100644 hw/fsi/lbus.c
create mode 100644 hw/fsi/Kconfig
create mode 100644 hw/fsi/meson.build
+DeviceState *lbus_create_device(FSILBus *bus, const char *type, uint32_t addr)
+{
+ DeviceState *dev;
+ FSILBusNode *node;
+ BusState *state = BUS(bus);
+
+ dev = qdev_new(type);
+ qdev_prop_set_uint8(dev, "address", addr);
+ qdev_realize_and_unref(dev, state, &error_fatal);
+
+ /* Move to post_load */
+ node = g_malloc(sizeof(struct FSILBusNode));
This allocation pattern is discouraged in favour of:
node = g_new0(FSILBusNode, 1);
I am using g_malloc() because I want program to terminate. I don't think
g_new0 provide this functionality. Please let me know.
All the glib memory allocation functions terminate on OOM, except
for the ones with '_try_' in their name.
Sorry, you are right. I have removed this function as per Cedric's comment.
Thanks for the review.
Regards,
Ninad
With regards,
Daniel
