On 4/19/21 6:20 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Mon, 19 Apr 2021 18:12:48 +0200 > Claudio Fontana <cfont...@suse.de> wrote: > >> On 4/19/21 11:11 AM, Claudio Fontana wrote: >>> Hi Cornelia, >>> >>> On 3/31/21 1:07 PM, Cornelia Huck wrote: >>>> On Mon, 22 Mar 2021 20:15:47 +0100 >>>> Claudio Fontana <cfont...@suse.de> wrote: > >>>>> @@ -25,6 +24,10 @@ s390x_ss.add(when: 'CONFIG_KVM', if_true: files( >>>>> 's390-stattrib-kvm.c', >>>>> 'pv.c', >>>>> )) >>>>> +s390x_ss.add(when: 'CONFIG_TCG', if_true: files( >>>>> + 'tod-qemu.c', >>>> >>>> Should we rename this to tod-tcg.c? >>> >>> I think so. >> >> Here we are a bit limited though by the fact that the object is currently >> called: >> >> include/hw/s390x/tod.h:26:#define TYPE_QEMU_S390_TOD TYPE_S390_TOD "-qemu" >> >> So there might be a compatibility issue in trying to make this consistent, >> which would mean to replace this with: >> >> #define TYPE_TCG_S390_TOD TYPE_S390_TOD "-tcg" >> >> What do you think? > > How visible is this? I don't think the TOD objects are instantiable by > the user. >
I just remember we were very conservative with the object hierarchy on x86, personally I am fine with the change. I will add this change then, I'd ask for people with concerns about this to speak up: (Paolo?) Ciao, CLaudio
