Re: [PATCH 0/6] Improve consistency of bus init function names

["Philippe Mathieu-Daudé" <philmd@redhat.com>]

On 9/23/21 14:11, Peter Maydell wrote:
> Currently we have a bit of a mishmash of different function
> names for bus creation. There are two basic patterns: you
> can have a function that allocates and returns a new bus
> object; or you can have a function that takes a pointer to
> a bus object and initializes it in-place. We have to some
> extent a convention for those: the allocate-and-return
> function is 'foo_new()', and the 'init in-place' function
> is 'foo_init()'. However many of our bus creation functions
> don't follow that; some use 'foo_new' vs 'foo_new_inplace';
> some use 'foo_new' for the in-place init version; and
> the bottom level qbus functions are 'qbus_create' vs
> 'qbus_create_inplace'. This series tries to bring at least
> scsi, ipack, pci, ide, and qbus into line with the
> _new-vs-_init naming convention.
> 
> The other issue with bus creation functions is that some
> of them take a 'name' argument which can be NULL, and some
> do not. Generally "pass in a specific name" should be the
> rare case, but our API design here is easy to misuse, and
> so a lot of callsites (especially for i2c, sd, ssi) pass
> in names when they should not. Untangling that mess is
> going to be tricky (see other thread for more), but as
> a first step, this series proposes a split between
> foo_bus_new() and foo_bus_new_named() where the latter
> takes a name parameter and the former does not. I do
> this only for scsi (and implicitly ide, whose ide_bus_new
> function already doesn't take a name argument) for the
> moment, as the other bus types have more of a mess of
> "pass name when they should not" callsites, so I didn't
> want to put in too much work before finding out if we
> had agreement on this as a naming convention.
> 
> There are definitely more buses that can be cleaned up
> to follow the init vs new convention, but this series is
> already touching 70 files and trying to do every bus in
> one series seems like a recipe for merge conflicts.
> So this seemed like enough to be going on with...
> 
> thanks
> -- PMM
> 
> Peter Maydell (6):
>    scsi: Replace scsi_bus_new() with scsi_bus_init(),
>      scsi_bus_init_named()
>    ipack: Rename ipack_bus_new_inplace() to ipack_bus_init()
>    pci: Rename pci_root_bus_new_inplace() to pci_root_bus_init()
>    qbus: Rename qbus_create_inplace() to qbus_init()
>    qbus: Rename qbus_create() to qbus_new()
>    ide: Rename ide_bus_new() to ide_bus_init()

Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com>