From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28206C388F9 for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 18:46:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 76B882068D for ; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 18:46:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="ABGuMDfT" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 76B882068D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:50400 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kcv8x-0000VH-BN for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:46:55 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:44816) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kcv1b-0000W3-NQ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:39:20 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:60209) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kcv1Z-0008DS-4y for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:39:19 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1605119953; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=3GbruwEim5Oz+NR1Pq/agreI9M/eP9YwMw3MCFICpaw=; b=ABGuMDfTYxKntGiq8P7k+CTegE1+eoHVubpRqS82ls+O8SeKTB7TSpYtsPo4ZFF8g0H1vi 04wWhHHnYtWgJw7t/4rFP6hbpp3yKdBhLzlkJ9Fjtltj3uL9wwi/Wae326S4Mb36w6V6K2 XiyFcekSib1eRAhTIMRvsJ/30eRDczs= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-13-2ZJmszYnNb-_Kwvb7umCSg-1; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:39:11 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 2ZJmszYnNb-_Kwvb7umCSg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C8C75F9EF; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 18:39:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (ovpn-114-68.rdu2.redhat.com [10.10.114.68]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 288D91002C28; Wed, 11 Nov 2020 18:39:06 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:39:05 -0500 From: Eduardo Habkost To: Kevin Wolf Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/44] Make qdev static property API usable by any QOM type Message-ID: <20201111183905.GO5733@habkost.net> References: <20201109113404.GA24970@merkur.fritz.box> <3b711053-e67a-86fb-59e7-c06948dd8928@redhat.com> <20201109152125.GZ5733@habkost.net> <2300fd53-afa1-b957-b33b-cff2986fcb93@redhat.com> <20201109171618.GA5733@habkost.net> <098ca211-3ad5-b194-e9f5-678291fe641e@redhat.com> <20201109185558.GB5733@habkost.net> <9659e726-7948-4e02-f303-abcbe4c96148@redhat.com> <20201109202855.GD5733@habkost.net> <20201110103804.GA6362@merkur.fritz.box> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201110103804.GA6362@merkur.fritz.box> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=ehabkost@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.205.24.124; envelope-from=ehabkost@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/11/11 01:49:01 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "Daniel P. Berrange" , Igor Mammedov , Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Markus Armbruster , =?utf-8?Q?Marc-Andr=C3=A9?= Lureau , Paolo Bonzini , John Snow , Stefan Berger Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 11:38:04AM +0100, Kevin Wolf wrote: > Am 09.11.2020 um 21:28 hat Eduardo Habkost geschrieben: [...] > > Anyway, If we are the only ones discussing this, I will just > > defer to your suggestions as QOM maintainer. I hope we hear from > > others. > > Well, I expressed my preference for what you're arguing for now, but my > expertise is more on the QAPI side than on the QOM side, so I can't > really contribute more arguments in the details than you are already > doing. Sorry, I didn't mean to ignore the feedback you had already sent. Let me rephrase: I was hoping we hear more from you and others. > > In the end, as soon as it's generated code, it won't matter much any > more what it looks like. But I'm not sure how soon we will be there and > for the meantime I'll always prefer static data to runtime code. Agreed. I really hope we can convince Paolo that properties as static const data are a desirable feature, and not a crippled API. Paolo convinced me that we still need object_class_add_field() for cases like x86, but I still believe static const arrays of properties should be the rule for all the rest. In the meantime, I'll do the following: I will submit v3 of this series with both object_class_property_add_field() and object_class_add_field_properties() as internal QOM APIs. object_class_add_field_properties() will be used to implement device_class_set_props(). After that, solving this controversy would be just a matter of deciding if we want to make object_class_add_field_properties() a public function or not. -- Eduardo