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=-15.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham 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 43490C63777 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 20:29:31 +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 8013B20781 for ; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 20:29:30 +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="BYds74hQ" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 8013B20781 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]:48012 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kf7MN-0006Mt-TX for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:13:51 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46470) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kf7Lj-0005kD-KZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:13:11 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:21865) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kf7Lf-0003P2-5J for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:13:11 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1605643985; 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: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=t21AfTFro+rR1EC0Vyt9TsauYIigU/PJOL6B/ZsFzuM=; b=BYds74hQVDltqCnnJ4jlQn+HGcGrcihXDDFRwGbPrwNIWPthC4QSlu1FIEgCfrGoouwguh ntmap8rT6DeBafDY2nkg6r9zbU76WMJ59euCpUCLNS+QdfQo8R2LHNUc8xxoJPLG+ZbkQM mPCz20IEd7ou6ZU4uxjNxbk97DkqN0w= 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-317-ybeCATrRPdWaYc6dp88Zog-1; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 15:12:55 -0500 X-MC-Unique: ybeCATrRPdWaYc6dp88Zog-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43B0080046B; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 20:12:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from thuth.remote.csb (ovpn-113-138.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.138]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13F5F1759F; Tue, 17 Nov 2020 20:12:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/13] bcm2835_cprman: put some peripherals of bcm2835 cprman into the 'misc' category To: Markus Armbruster References: <20201115184903.1292715-1-ganqixin@huawei.com> <20201115184903.1292715-14-ganqixin@huawei.com> <882df4ee-948c-7e00-d951-9b14ea40b2df@redhat.com> <877dqldyoh.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> From: Thomas Huth Message-ID: Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 21:12:49 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <877dqldyoh.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=thuth@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.205.24.124; envelope-from=thuth@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/11/17 01:18:45 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, 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=unavailable 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: zhang.zhanghailiang@huawei.com, qemu-trivial@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, =?UTF-8?Q?Philippe_Mathieu-Daud=c3=a9?= , Gan Qixin , kuhn.chenqun@huawei.com Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" On 16/11/2020 18.00, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Thomas Huth writes: > >> On 16/11/2020 14.25, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: >>> Hi Gan, >>> >>> On 11/15/20 7:49 PM, Gan Qixin wrote: >>>> Some peripherals of bcm2835 cprman have no category, put them into the 'misc' >>>> category. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Gan Qixin >>>> --- >>>> Cc: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé >>>> --- >>>> hw/misc/bcm2835_cprman.c | 4 ++++ >>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/hw/misc/bcm2835_cprman.c b/hw/misc/bcm2835_cprman.c >>>> index 7e415a017c..c62958a99e 100644 >>>> --- a/hw/misc/bcm2835_cprman.c >>>> +++ b/hw/misc/bcm2835_cprman.c >>>> @@ -136,6 +136,7 @@ static void pll_class_init(ObjectClass *klass, void *data) >>>> >>>> dc->reset = pll_reset; >>>> dc->vmsd = &pll_vmstate; >>>> + set_bit(DEVICE_CATEGORY_MISC, dc->categories); >>> >>> Well, this is not an usable device but a part of a bigger device, >>> so here we want the opposite: not list this device in any category. >>> >>> Maybe we could add a DEVICE_CATEGORY_COMPOSITE for all such QOM >>> types so management apps can filter them out? (And so we are sure >>> all QOM is classified). >>> >>> Thomas, you already dealt with categorizing devices in the past, >>> what do you think about this? Who else could help? Maybe add >>> someone from libvirt in the thread? >> >> My 0.02 € : Mark the device as user_creatable = false if it can not really >> be used by the user with the -device CLI parameter. Then it also does not >> need a category. I know Markus will likely have a different opinion, but in > > You're hurting my feelings! ;-P > >> my eyes it's just ugly if we present devices to the users that they can not use. > > If we believe a device should only ever be used from C, then we should > keep it away from the UI. > > However, I'm wary of overloading user_creatable. Even though it has > shifted shape a number of times (cannot_instantiate_with_device_add_yet, > no_user, and now user_creatable), its purpose has always been focused: > distinguishing devices that can be instantiated by generic code from the > ones that need device-specific code. See user_creatable's comment in > qdev-core.h. > > I don't want to lose that distinction. That's all. Well, currently we have the user_creatable flag and the hotpluggable flag. I guess that's simply not enough. I think in the long run, we should maybe replace the two flags with a "creatable" type instead that could take the following values: CREATABLE_AS_SUBDEVICE /* Device is part of another device and can only by added by code */ CREATABLE_BY_QOM /* Some fancy new QOM function can be used to e.g. create this as part of a machine */ CREATABLE_BY_COLDPLUG /* For cold-plugging via -device */ CREATABLE_BY_HOTPLUG /* For hot-plugging via device_add */ ... but that's likely something for the distant future... >> (By the way, this device here seems to be a decendant of TYPE_SYS_BUS_DEVICE >> ... shouldn't these show up as user_creatable = false automatically?) > > Yes, unless it is a dynamic sysbus device (which I consider a flawed > concept). > > But TYPE_CPRMAN_PLL is *not* a descendant of TYPE_SYS_BUS_DEVICE, it's a > bus-less device: Oops, I obviously looked at the wrong device in that file (TYPE_BCM2835_CPRMAN instead of TYPE_CPRMAN_PLL) - thanks for the clarification! Thomas