From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34892) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aOpU9-0002bh-Rn for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 11:31:54 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aOpU6-0002IQ-MT for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 11:31:53 -0500 Received: from greensocs.com ([193.104.36.180]:56551) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aOpU6-0002IC-Ah for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 28 Jan 2016 11:31:50 -0500 Message-ID: <56AA4272.4090808@greensocs.com> Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 17:31:46 +0100 From: Frederic Konrad MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v1 00/15] data-driven device registers List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Peter Maydell Cc: Edgar Iglesias , "qemu-devel@nongnu.org Developers" , Alistair Francis , Peter Crosthwaite , Edgar Iglesias , =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= On 08/01/2016 11:40, Peter Maydell wrote: > On 8 January 2016 at 00:39, Alistair Francis > wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 8:33 AM, Alistair Francis >> wrote: >>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Peter Maydell wrote: >>>> On 15 December 2015 at 20:52, Peter Crosthwaite >>>> wrote: >>>>> It needs to exist before it can be used so there is a bit of a chic= ken >>>>> and egg problem there. >> No one seems to be jumping at reviewing this. Can we just send a pull = request? > I don't necessarily require review [*]. I would like *somebody* other > than you Xilinx folk to say "yes, I think I would use this for > modelling devices". Otherwise all we have is "weird thing used > only in two or three Xilinx devices and nowhere else", which I'm > a bit reluctant to let into the tree. We already have a pretty > wide divergence in how devices look just based on the various > transitions from older to newer qdev/QOM/etc that are not complete. > > [*] by which I mean, I will review this series if you can find > somebody else who's going to say they'd use it. > > thanks > -- PMM > Hi Peter, This is useful for us as well. My point view is that it is an easy and clean way of implementing devices= =2E BTW we have the same mechanism to model devices in SystemC. Thanks, Fred