Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45154)
by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
(envelope-from
) id 1ZpdqN-0006Xn-0x
for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 11:01:24 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
(envelope-from ) id 1ZpdqH-0006zZ-UW
for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 11:01:22 -0400
Received: from mailout2.w1.samsung.com ([210.118.77.12]:22809)
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
(envelope-from ) id 1ZpdqH-0006z3-PG
for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 11:01:17 -0400
Received: from eucpsbgm1.samsung.com (unknown [203.254.199.244])
by mailout2.w1.samsung.com
(Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7.0.5.31.0 64bit (built May 5
2014)) with ESMTP id <0NWO005ZPHQ1UR60@mailout2.w1.samsung.com> for
qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 23 Oct 2015 16:01:13 +0100 (BST)
From: Pavel Fedin
References: <011101d10cca$e51598e0$af40caa0$@samsung.com>
In-reply-to:
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 18:01:12 +0300
Message-id: <013801d10da3$a89ac280$f9d04780$@samsung.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
Content-language: ru
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] target-arm: Extract some external ARM
CPU API
List-Id:
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
To: 'Peter Maydell'
Cc: 'Shlomo Pongratz' , 'Shlomo Pongratz' , 'QEMU Developers'
Hello!
> Please don't do two things in one patch. (I actually read this patch
> code-first and thought you'd accidentally inserted this change due
> to a rebasing mishap...) It's particularly bad in patches which are
> otherwise almost entirely moving code from one file to another,
> because it's easy to overlook the substantive change in the resulting
> large patch.
Ok, ok, sorry... I really wanted to push this in somehow, and i thought =
that maybe you'll like it as a little thing that completes the reusable =
API.
Should i post v2 with this hunk removed?
=20
> > +typedef struct ARMCPUClass {
> > + /*< private >*/
> > + CPUClass parent_class;
> > + /*< public >*/
> > +
> > + DeviceRealize parent_realize;
> > + void (*parent_reset)(CPUState *cpu);
> > +} ARMCPUClass;
>=20
> I'm slightly surprised we need to define the ARMCPUClass struct
> here -- what needs the definition rather than just the typedef,
> or is this just to follow other header files?
Other header files, i believe, do it for a reason. To tell the truth i =
made the patch very quickly, and didn't have much time to dig in =
OBJECT_CLASS_CHECK() internals. Does it need a sizeof() maybe? And =
without it thing looked a bit ugly and incomplete.
Class structure is pretty self-sufficient and straightforward, so i =
just moved it too.
I'll reply to the rest of messages on monday, weekend is coming. :)
Kind regards,
Pavel Fedin
Expert Engineer
Samsung Electronics Research center Russia