On 05/01/2012 03:43 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
Am 01.05.2012 22:37, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
On 05/01/2012 02:05 PM, Andreas Färber wrote:
Am 01.05.2012 20:18, schrieb Anthony Liguori:
This allows a base class to easily add properties.

Signed-off-by: Anthony Liguori<aligu...@us.ibm.com>

Implementation looks okay but /me not so happy with it: This conflicts
with the move of the qdev static property infrastructure from
DeviceState to Object.

Consider rebasing this onto part of Paolo's series and call it

Eh?  There's nothing object_ about these properties and there's no way
I'm willing to put legacy properties in object...

So I'm not quite sure what you're suggesting.

You just suggested to Peter using qdev_add_properties() in new QOM ARM
classes of his.

I'd rather not propagate using qdev_* functions in new QOM code because
either it remains forever or renaming becomes another touch-all series.

In Paolo's series the Property* concept is moved from qdev to QOM; thus
if it's in Object we usually use an object_ prefix.
Not too long ago you were willing to merge the large part of Paolo's
series which included this code movement, so if you don't want that
after all you should communicate that openly as a reply there. :)

Legacy properties != static properties.

qdev_add_properties adds both legacy and static properties. I'm happy to put static properties into object but not legacy properties.

So qdev_add_properties is going to stick around even after Paolo's changes.

Base classes are free to call object_property_add_static directly and avoid qdev_add_properties entirely but we need the later for backwards compat.


Anthony Liguori


Reply via email to