On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 08:21:17PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 17 October 2012 19:11, Anthony Liguori <anth...@codemonkey.ws> wrote: > > It's dangerously close to bike-shedding, but i don't think qdev belongs > > in qom/. It's not core infrastructure. It's the device base class and > > belongs IMHO in hw/. > > "-user emulators don't get anything from hw/" is one of those semi > arbitrary but easily definable lines that I'd prefer it if we didn't > break. (Although IIRC there was a directory-renaming proposal recently > which maybe defines some different lines instead.)
I just rememberd another reason for moving qdev-core to qom: the CPU class itself (that's going to be a child of DeviceState) is already inside qom. Keeping qdev-core it on hw/ would mean having a qom->hw->qom dependency chain (qom/cpu.c -> hw/qdev.c -> qom/object.c). So, by now I am keeping the proposed patch as-is (moving qdev-core to qom/). -- Eduardo
