From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34852) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZbeCo-0005fZ-MN for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:34:43 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZbeCn-0003J4-Gx for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 14 Sep 2015 20:34:42 -0400 Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 10:30:36 +1000 From: David Gibson Message-ID: <20150915003036.GR2547@voom.fritz.box> References: <1442194913-26545-1-git-send-email-david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> <1442194913-26545-2-git-send-email-david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> <55F683CB.6000508@ozlabs.ru> <20150914114503.GP2547@voom.fritz.box> <55F6B989.8010900@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="VdnGiXwuH6t1Tqzo" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <55F6B989.8010900@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFCv2 1/2] spapr: Remove unnecessary owner field from sPAPRDRConnector List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: mdroth@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Alexey Kardashevskiy , agraf@suse.de, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, bharata@linux.vnet.ibm.com --VdnGiXwuH6t1Tqzo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 02:11:53PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On 14/09/2015 13:45, David Gibson wrote: > >>>=20 > >>> =3D=3D=3D * There is no way for a child to determine what its parent > >>> is. It is not * a bidirectional relationship. This is by > >>> design. =3D=3D=3D > >>>=20 > >>> This part always confused me as there is "Object *parent" in > >>> the "struct Object". So there is way to determine but it must > >>> not be used? Is it debug only? > >>>=20 > >>> Anyway, all members of the Object class are under /*< private > >>> >*/ so they should not be accesses in sPAPR code, I believe. > > Ah, good point, I missed that. I guess we have to keep the owner=20 > > field, redundant though it seems. Blech. >=20 > I think the comment is wrong or at least inaccurate; it only applies > to the external QOM interface. The patch is a good idea, even though > OBJECT(x)->y traditionally is not used (instead you assign OBJECT(x) to > a different Object* variable). Ok.. so are you prepared to give a Reviewed-by, or do I need to ask someone else (Andreas?) to approve this as QOMishly correct? --=20 David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson --VdnGiXwuH6t1Tqzo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJV92asAAoJEGw4ysog2bOSJUIQAM6LqjLPkehzgmxcPe/WWmDf Q2Zrr3NdgdUqRHmU1/QH3ipOAh5qYay9oxhpsqZNroml1u5xSH0vebrzu2z08fqZ PetadFqDRR822J6UjSTISFj5ub7nMcJWFHGRSptBqt5GbuCjs6Q3/1YCNXFG6Kzw 6urgHeAj0yHerEKEP8lAtKg1MqHRx81asOH3uN6elZZBxYjvGvZ9KTLs9e/b77NJ iu8QQLEQzbkacC2SuuYk9dTrdNNpDY6x9pdvUQpvcreG8ClvRPK5OZpRqeErm0ij c3CMsP0YlAvHaPv+fhLAJHOes/OSjvvb937VHb//GXGQYI2BpzQJj3cKce4/czGm oYp2HAxZVVGdgbeqAqCOe5gwKEis0EBUHU/WdEtABeLMK1cnCV4YN0AEjTjFsThN Rc4FadL6a3rgbq7mmnYgnxeZuMqdZlW1JGVrRld1QQ4ToRWnZ2DmIFL8k+BGlhtr 0NtztAJiHJ/FsegcddrkikI0ixFATTESuCp/iqfBunkaG0qkS6f3u68NmNF1waO+ A4MfD4knEDiO+rHvqge9bkHNBaSDcPNctPtPHqz6lJqeVX513Aca3IHktmKx309H hE/s6pG4OWGQUvOsQA1dWryIBRIqcjCATNa5L2gu5dY2dpv9FyiK5NvF0MEEQvaL c/Q4eGa5aEHnSzmBKbak =M896 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --VdnGiXwuH6t1Tqzo--