From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55100) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gL6en-0006wO-9H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Nov 2018 08:17:06 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gL6ei-0007D3-Au for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Nov 2018 08:17:05 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:51962) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gL6ei-0007Bt-1H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 09 Nov 2018 08:17:00 -0500 References: <20181109111731.vxdmqmkorblcnntx@sirius.home.kraxel.org> <20181109112953.w4wtltwxpl4z2lpj@sirius.home.kraxel.org> <1724064a-acdc-5571-4f54-f0ac021027d0@redhat.com> From: Paolo Bonzini Message-ID: <6e7304f6-b81a-982f-a94c-d8df4202a82e@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2018 14:16:53 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1724064a-acdc-5571-4f54-f0ac021027d0@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] List of files containing devices which have not been QOMified List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Thomas Huth , Gerd Hoffmann , Peter Maydell Cc: QEMU Developers , Markus Armbruster On 09/11/2018 13:39, Thomas Huth wrote: > On 2018-11-09 12:29, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 12:17:31PM +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>>> I am also suspicious about hw/bt/ but don't know enough >>>> about that subsystem to say if it could benefit from >>>> using QOM objects more. >>> >>> I'm wondering whenever anyone would even notice if we just rm -rf hw/bt >>> >>> Looking through the changelog for the last five years (after hw/ split) >>> the only thing I see is fixing warnings from compiler or coverity, >>> adapting to changes in other systems (chardev for example) and treewide >>> changes. Not a *single* patch specific to bluetooth ... >> >> Tried this after studying docs: >> >> qemu -usb -device usb-bt-dongle -bt hci,vlan=0 -bt device:keyboard >> >> Segfaults right anway on first keypress. >> I guess that qualifies as "broken and obviously unused". > > Thanks for checking! I guess that means we could even get rid of it > without deprecating it first if it is broken already for more than two > releases...? I think what others were using bluetooth passthrough. But it's certainly possible that it's broken. Paolo