[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH 6/8] hw/ide: Do ide_drive_get() within pci_ide_create_devs()

From: Markus Armbruster
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] hw/ide: Do ide_drive_get() within pci_ide_create_devs()
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 07:23:12 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux)

Paolo Bonzini <address@hidden> writes:

> On 13/03/20 23:16, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
>>> +    pci_dev = pci_create_simple(pci_bus, -1, "cmd646-ide");
>>> +    pci_ide_create_devs(pci_dev);
>> Additionally, I think it may also make sense to move pci_ide_create_devs
>> call into the realize methods of these IDE controllers so boards do not
>> need to do it explicitely. These calls always follow the creation of the
>> device immediately so could just be done internally in IDE device and
>> simplify it further. I can attempt to prepare additional patches for
>> that but first I'd like to hear if anyone has anything against that to
>> avoid doing useless work.
> No, it's better to do it separately.  I think that otherwise you could
> add another IDE controller with -device, and both controllers would try
> to add the drives.


Creating device frontends for -drive if=ide is the board's job.  Boards
may delegate to suitable helpers.  I'd very much prefer these helpers
not to live with device model code.  Board and device model code should
be cleanly separated to to reduce the temptation to muddle their
responsibilities.  It's separation of concerns.

I actually wish we had separate sub-trees for boards and devices instead
of keeping both in hw/.

> Basically, separating the call means that only automatically added
> controllers obey "if=ide".

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]