Il 13/04/2012 16:06, Andreas Färber ha scritto: > I'm still talking about the (pretty clear to me) graph that I posted. > There, object A's init function creates a new qdev object - . Creating > an object can fail - fatally or non-fatally. > > And yes, exactly my point, currently initfn (first stage) cannot fail, > only the second stage (DeviceClass::init). Which is why I've been saying > we'll need to refactor those "fake composition" usages first before we > declare that we can defer qdev initialization to vl.c.
But why should they fail? This is what I also asked. If instance-init is deterministic, it will either always or never fail (besides cases like memory allocation which cannot really be handled correctly). Paolo
