* Greg Kurz (gr...@kaod.org) wrote: > On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 18:25:55 +0100 > "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilb...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > * Peter Maydell (peter.mayd...@linaro.org) wrote: > > > On 22 June 2017 at 18:03, Juan Quintela <quint...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > Greg Kurz <gr...@kaod.org> wrote: > > > >> On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 17:14:08 +0100 > > > >> Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> On 22 June 2017 at 17:06, Greg Kurz <gr...@kaod.org> wrote: > > > >>> > Function types cannot reside in the same sorted list as opaque > > > >>> > types since > > > >>> > they may depend on a type which would be defined later. > > > >>> > > > > >>> > Of course, the same problem could arise if a function type depends > > > >>> > on > > > >>> > another function type with greater alphabetical order. Hopefully we > > > >>> > don't have that at this time. > > > >>> > > > >>> The other approach would be to put function types somewhere > > > >>> else and leave typedefs.h for the simple 'opaque types > > > >>> for structures' that it was started as. > > > >>> > > > >>> For instance we have include/qemu/fprintf-fn.h as a precedent. > > > >>> > > > >> > > > >> Indeed, and I'm not quite sure why Juan decided to put these types into > > > >> typedefs.h instead of a dedicated header file in include/migration... > > > >> is > > > >> it only because it was the quickest fix ? > > > > > > > > All other typedefs were defined there. I can create a different include > > > > file, but I think that is "overengineering", no? They are typedefs, > > > > just not of structs. But I agree that they are the only ones. > > > > > > Well, the comment in the file says "opaque types so that device init > > > declarations don't have to pull in all the real definitions", whereas > > > the ones you've added aren't opaque types, they are the real > > > definitions. They're also only used by a very small subset of .c > > > files, whereas typedefs.h goes everywhere. > > > > mv fprintf-fn.f fn-typedefs.h > > > > move those two defs into that? > > > > Wouldn't it be more appropriate to put them in a dedicated > include/migration/handler-fn.h header included by both > vmstate.h and register.h ?
Could do; I'm just not finding tiny header files with one or two entries each that useful. Dave > > Dave > > > > > thanks > > > -- PMM > > -- > > Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK > > > -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilb...@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
