Re: [PATCH v3 07/16] hw/i386/vmport: Introduce vmport.h

[Liran Alon]

On 14/03/2020 20:25, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 09:31:31AM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > On 3/13/20 11:38 PM, Liran Alon wrote:
> > > On 13/03/2020 21:57, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > > > On 3/12/20 5:54 PM, Liran Alon wrote:
> > > > > No functional change. This is mere refactoring.
> > > > >
> > > > > Suggested-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <address@hidden>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Liran Alon <address@hidden>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >    hw/i386/pc.c             |  1 +
> > > > >    hw/i386/vmmouse.c        |  1 +
> > > > >    hw/i386/vmport.c         |  1 +
> > > > >    include/hw/i386/pc.h     | 13 -------------
> > > > >    include/hw/i386/vmport.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> > > > What about moving it to hw/i386/vmport.h (no under include/)?
> > > >
> > > > Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <address@hidden>
> > > Can you explain the logic that separates between hw/i386/*.h to
> > > include/hw/i386/*.h?
> > Headers in the include/hw/ namespace can be consumed by all machine targets.
> > If this is a target-specific device, having it local to the target
> > (hw/i386/) protect generic code (and other targets) of using it. This helps
> > detecting wrong dependencies between components.
> I think it's true. However when headers were moved to include we
> weren't always able to do this correctly. So some i386
> specific headers are under include.
OK. So if I understand correctly, you also support moving this header to 
hw/i386/ instead of include/hw/i386/.
So I will do so in v4.

Thanks,
-Liran