----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jan Kiszka" <jan.kis...@siemens.com> > To: "Andreas Färber" <afaer...@suse.de> > Cc: "Igor Mammedov" <imamm...@redhat.com>, "Anthony Liguori" > <aligu...@us.ibm.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Igor > Mammedov" <niall...@gmail.com>, "Paolo Bonzini" <pbonz...@redhat.com> > Sent: Friday, June 8, 2012 2:36:53 PM > Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH qom-next 04/59] pc: Add CPU as > /machine/cpu[n] > > On 2012-06-08 14:34, Andreas Färber wrote: > > Am 08.06.2012 14:05, schrieb Igor Mammedov: > >> On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 11:11:11AM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: > >>> Another factor that is making this slightly difficult is that > >>> there are > >>> three APIC subclasses. Currently they all have an instance_size > >>> of > >>> sizeof(APICCommonState) so it could be created in-place if it > >>> actually > >>> is a part (child<>) of the CPU wrt hot-plug. Creating objects > >>> with > >>> object_new() in QOM instance_init is forbidden. > >> Any particular reason why object_new() in intifn is not > >> acceptable? > > > > It allocates memory, which may fail. The initfn must not fail, the > > realizefn may return an Error object. > > Since when do we fail gracefully on OOM again? Maybe Andreas means that we cannot report error to caller? If it's a case then lets pass error to object_new() and fail gracefully or simply abort on OOM.
BTW: in-place creation looks ugly compared to object_new(), not mentioning complications if being initialized object could be of different sizes. > > Jan > > -- > Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1 > Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux > >
