Re: [PATCH 05/12] hw/i2c/smbus_ich9: Inline ich9_smb_init() and remove it

[Corey Minyard]

On Mon, Feb 27, 2023 at 12:53:23PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 19/2/23 15:21, Corey Minyard wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 02:45:44PM +0100, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> > > On 18/2/23 21:25, Corey Minyard wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 06:30:26PM +0100, Bernhard Beschow wrote:
> > > > > ich9_smb_init() is a legacy init function, so modernize the code.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Note that the smb_io_base parameter was unused.
> > > > 
> > > > Acked-by: Corey Minyard <cminyard@mvista.com>
> > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Bernhard Beschow <shentey@gmail.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >    include/hw/i386/ich9.h |  1 -
> > > > >    hw/i2c/smbus_ich9.c    | 13 +++----------
> > > > >    hw/i386/pc_q35.c       | 11 ++++++++---
> > > > >    3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> > > > > 
> > > > > diff --git a/include/hw/i386/ich9.h b/include/hw/i386/ich9.h
> > > > > index 05464f6965..52ea116f44 100644
> > > > > --- a/include/hw/i386/ich9.h
> > > > > +++ b/include/hw/i386/ich9.h
> > > > > @@ -9,7 +9,6 @@
> > > > >    #include "qom/object.h"
> > > > >    void ich9_lpc_pm_init(PCIDevice *pci_lpc, bool smm_enabled);
> > > > > -I2CBus *ich9_smb_init(PCIBus *bus, int devfn, uint32_t smb_io_base);
> > > > >    void ich9_generate_smi(void);
> > > > > diff --git a/hw/i2c/smbus_ich9.c b/hw/i2c/smbus_ich9.c
> > > > > index d29c0f6ffa..f0dd3cb147 100644
> > > > > --- a/hw/i2c/smbus_ich9.c
> > > > > +++ b/hw/i2c/smbus_ich9.c
> > > > > @@ -105,6 +105,9 @@ static void ich9_smbus_realize(PCIDevice *d, 
> > > > > Error **errp)
> > > > >        pm_smbus_init(&d->qdev, &s->smb, false);
> > > > >        pci_register_bar(d, ICH9_SMB_SMB_BASE_BAR, 
> > > > > PCI_BASE_ADDRESS_SPACE_IO,
> > > > >                         &s->smb.io);
> > > > > +
> > > > > +    s->smb.set_irq = ich9_smb_set_irq;
> > > > > +    s->smb.opaque = s;
> > > 
> > > Corey, shouldn't we expand pm_smbus_init() to take set_irq / opaque
> > > arguments?
> > 
> > That would be nice, but the other two user of this function,
> > hw/isa/vt82c686.c and hw/acpi/piix4.c, don't use these fields.
> > I doubt we are getting any new users.  I'm fine either way, but the
> > value is not large.
> 
> The value is in enforcing stricter APIs (providing good examples).

I agree, and the change would be good, but IMHO it's beyond the scope of
this change and would slow things down.

I'll prepare a patch that does this.

Thanks,

-corey

> 
> Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
> 
>