Re: [RFC v1 09/10] i386: split cpu.c and defer x86 models registration

[Eduardo Habkost]

On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 11:41:46AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 10/11/20 11:04, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > 
> > ie, we should have one class hierarchy for CPU model definitions, and
> > one class hierarchy  for accelerator CPU implementations.
> > 
> > So at runtime we then get two object instances - a CPU implementation
> > and a CPU definition. The CPU implementation object should have a
> > property which is a link to the desired CPU definition.
> 
> It doesn't even have to be two object instances.  The implementation can be
> nothing more than a set of function pointers.

A set of function pointers is exactly what a QOM interface is.
Could the methods be provided by a TYPE_X86_ACCEL interface type,
implemented by the accel object?

-- 
Eduardo