Re: [RFC PATCH 00/12] QOM/QAPI integration part 1

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

On 11/3/21 18:29, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> This series adds QOM class definitions to the QAPI schema, introduces
> a new TypeInfo.instance_config() callback that configures the object at
> creation time (instead of setting properties individually) and is
> separate from runtime property setters (which often used to be not
> really tested for runtime use), and finally generates a marshalling
> function for .instance_config() from the QAPI schema that makes this a
> natural C interface rather than a visitor based one.

That's pretty cool!

Just one question: why not always use boxed configuration?  It should 
not make the instance_config types any larger, and it avoids unwieldy 
argument lists.

Also, for the obligatory bikeshedding remark, do you have any other 
plans or ideas for the colon-separated auto generated typenames?  Having 
both the "namespace" (qom) and the more specific use (config) before the 
classname is a bit weird, compared to the existing structs like 
RngRandomProperties.  Especially if boxed config is more used (or 
becomes the only possibility), it might be that qom:class-name:config, 
or even just class-name:config, make for nicer code in the object 
implementation.

Paolo