On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 11:13 AM Daniel P. Berrangé <berra...@redhat.com> wrote: > I wonder if starting with a device implementation is perhaps the > wrong idea, in terms of a practical yet simple first step. > > As devices go, the pl011 device is simple, but compared to other > QOM impls in QEMU, devices are still relatively complex things, > especially if we want to write against safe abstraction.
It's true, but I think _some_ complexity provides a better guide as to what are the next step. I think it's clear that they are, not in this order: * calling QOM methods (Chardev) * implementing QOM objects * implementing QOM devices ** qdev properties ** MemoryRegion callbacks * implementing Chardev callbacks * general technique for bindings for C structs (Error, QAPI) > If we did this I think we would not have to give a "free pass" > for a hackish C-like first Rust impl. We would have something > designed well from day 1, showing small, but tangible benefits, > with a path to incrementally broadening the effort. I don't think it's that easy to have something self contained for a single submission. Reviewing the build system is a completely different proposition than reviewing generic-heavy QOM bindings. Paolo
