Re: [Qemu-devel] KVM call agenda for Tuesday 7

[Paolo Bonzini]

On 02/07/2012 05:33 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> Hrm, I don't like that very much.

Yes, me neither actually.

If the object representing the state of the OMAP board (struct 
omap_mpu_state_s) is QOMified, the clocks can easily get under it in the 
composition tree.  Right now, that part is not even qdev. :)

> OMAP clocks are devices.  Don't they belong in the devices hierarchy
> under the omap-clocks branch?

If they were devices, yes.  But they're not, and it wouldn't have been a 
great time investment to refactor them. :)

Perhaps we can have /machine instead of /devices, a more generic name 
would do well.  Then...

> The fact that they aren't DeviceState's is because DeviceState is a pile
> of cruft.  Perhaps we should introduce a more streamlined Device base
> class and rename DeviceState to LegacyDevice or something like that.

... light-weight components can inherit straight from Object and go 
under /machine.  There would be /machine/clocks for example.

Paolo