From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:42017) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RzZLp-00064U-UE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:56:47 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RzZLo-0005OZ-Q4 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:56:45 -0500 Received: from mail-qw0-f45.google.com ([209.85.216.45]:51387) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RzZLo-0005OO-Nh for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:56:44 -0500 Received: by qabg40 with SMTP id g40so3487152qab.4 for ; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 11:56:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4F42A45E.5010608@suse.de> References: <1328687721-16030-1-git-send-email-peter.crosthwaite@petalogix.com> <201202081139.49413.paul@codesourcery.com> <201202081228.00120.paul@codesourcery.com> <1116A54F-BE1E-4620-BDC8-6B6A1A63D3B6@suse.de> <4F327CD4.1060502@codemonkey.ws> <4F42A45E.5010608@suse.de> Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 19:56:43 +0000 Message-ID: From: Peter Maydell Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] arm boot: added QOM device definition List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: =?UTF-8?Q?Andreas_F=C3=A4rber?= Cc: aliguori@us.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Alexander Graf , Peter Crosthwaite , Paul Brook On 20 February 2012 19:51, Andreas F=C3=A4rber wrote: > Am 20.02.2012 20:43, schrieb Peter Maydell: >> I don't particularly care how we QOMify arm_boot (it's not exactly at >> the top of my priority list demanding attention), I do care that (a) >> we have a sensible user-facing interface [ie command line options] and >> (b) vl.c can usefully just pass the information from those options >> straight to the boot loader code. > > A QOM'ified arm_boot could get a "virtual" callback method to check the > QemuOpts command line args. That way derived classes can decide what > additional options to accept. > > An alternative would be to expect QOM properties of the same name as the > command line parameters and fail if there isn't one of that name. You'd also need vl.c to be able to say "find me the first boot loader of any kind in the qom tree" so it could set the properties on the right thing. But really qomifying arm_boot doesn't excite me very much -- it doesn't really get us anything useful in the way that qomifying SysBus, for instance, does. So my preference is not to have to tie device tree support to it. -- PMM