On Thu, 27 Oct 2016 14:37:28 -0200
Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 05:30:30PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> [...]
> > > > "make V=1 check" fails for me with this patch applied:
> > > >
> > > > QTEST_QEMU_BINARY=aarch64-softmmu/qemu-system-aarch64
> > > > QTEST_QEMU_IMG=qemu-img MALLOC_PERTURB_=${MALLOC_PERTURB_:-$((RANDOM %
> > > > 255 + 1))} gtester -k --verbose -m=quick tests/device-introspect-test
> > > > tests/qom-test
> > > > TEST: tests/device-introspect-test... (pid=275141)
> > > > /aarch64/device/introspect/list:
> > > > OK
> > > > /aarch64/device/introspect/none:
> > > > OK
> > > > /aarch64/device/introspect/abstract:
> > > > OK
> > > > /aarch64/device/introspect/concrete:
> > > > Unexpected error in object_property_find() at
> > > > /home/imammedo/builds/qemu/qom/object.c:1002:
> > > > Property '.disable_vnet_hdr' not found
> > >
> > > Oops! Caused by the e1000e PropertyInfo hack that I tried to
> > > remove yesterday. See "e1000e: QOM property & configuration
> > > cleanups".
> > It's property registration ordering issue exposed by 3/8
> >
> > simple this this series should include after 3/8:
>
> I'm considering simply squashing the fix below in 3/8, what do
> you think?
fine by me
>
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/net/e1000e.c b/hw/net/e1000e.c
> > index 368d284..b26760d 100644
> > --- a/hw/net/e1000e.c
> > +++ b/hw/net/e1000e.c
> > @@ -671,7 +671,6 @@ static void e1000e_class_init(ObjectClass *class, void
> > *data)
> > dc->desc = "Intel 82574L GbE Controller";
> > dc->reset = e1000e_qdev_reset;
> > dc->vmsd = &e1000e_vmstate;
> > - device_class_set_props(dc, e1000e_properties);
> >
> > e1000e_prop_disable_vnet = qdev_prop_uint8;
> > e1000e_prop_disable_vnet.description = "Do not use virtio headers, "
> > @@ -683,6 +682,7 @@ static void e1000e_class_init(ObjectClass *class, void
> > *data)
> >
> > e1000e_prop_subsys = qdev_prop_uint16;
> > e1000e_prop_subsys.description = "PCI device Subsystem ID";
> > + device_class_set_props(dc, e1000e_properties);
> >
> > set_bit(DEVICE_CATEGORY_NETWORK, dc->categories);
> > }
> >
> > or event better fix ordering issues first and then generate 3/8 on top of
> > that.
> > I wonder how many similar ordering 3/8 causes.
>
> I've grepped for PropertyInfo usage, and this seems to be the
> only case where PropertyInfo structs are modified at runtime.
>
