Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC v4 44/44] qom: Introduce CPU class

[Paolo Bonzini]

Il 13/03/2012 13:53, Andreas Färber ha scritto:
>> >  Methods should not take a superclass
>> > argument in general.
> So to clarify, this is pro CPUState?

Yes.

>>> >> This series is taking much too long to move forward (the QOM "steam"
>>> >> seems to be gone?) and I'm worried that introducing much more basic 
>>> >> infrastructure will make review and applying even slower, cf. 
>>> >> object_class_foreach_ordered()/_get_list().
>> > 
>> > Agreed, this series looks more or less good (and mostly mechanical
>> > anyway).
> Thanks.
> 
>> >  Is it an RFC or what? :)  I wonder if reviewers are put off by
>> > the subject.
> The implied RFC is, are we okay with reusing "CPUState" this way? Or
> does someone - last call! - have a better identifier name?
> 
> Getting this series merged either means coordinating the PULL with a
> maintainer so that no merge conflicts arise in-flight, or having the
> maintainer re-run the commit-creating script himself.

FWIW I like it. :)

Paolo