Re: does drive_get_next(IF_NONE) make sense?

[Peter Maydell]

On Mon, 15 Nov 2021 at 13:24, Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com> wrote:
> Same question as for Hao Wu's series: Wouldn't the proper solution be to
> add a drive property to the machine type?
>
> If you can't use -blockdev, it's not done right.

Is there an example of "doing it right" for built-in-to-the-machine
devices?

(My experience with the new-style options is that almost
always they're designed for x86 where the device they're attached
to is also created on the command line, and then handling of boards
where the device is builtin is either an afterthought or forgotten.
See also -netdev, where it took forever for built-in-ethernet to
be usable.)

-- PMM