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