On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 01:22:23PM +0200, Igor Mammedov wrote:
[...]
> static void x86_cpuid_version_get_family(Object *obj, Visitor *v, void
> *opaque,
> const char *name, Error **errp)
> {
> @@ -1801,6 +1898,12 @@ static void x86_cpu_initfn(Object *obj)
> object_property_add(obj, "tsc-frequency", "int",
> x86_cpuid_get_tsc_freq,
> x86_cpuid_set_tsc_freq, NULL, NULL, NULL);
> + x86_register_cpuid_properties(obj, feature_name);
> + x86_register_cpuid_properties(obj, ext_feature_name);
> + x86_register_cpuid_properties(obj, ext2_feature_name);
> + x86_register_cpuid_properties(obj, ext3_feature_name);
> + x86_register_cpuid_properties(obj, kvm_feature_name);
> + x86_register_cpuid_properties(obj, svm_feature_name);
Stupid question about qdev:
- qdev_prop_set_globals() is called from device_initfn()
- device_initfn() is called before the child class instance_init()
function (x86_cpu_initfn())
- So, qdev_prop_set_globals() gets called before the CPU class
properties are registered.
So this would defeat the whole point of all the work we're doing, that
is to allow compatibility bits to be set as machine-type global
properties. But I don't know what's the right solution here.
Should the qdev_prop_set_globals() call be moved to qdev_init() instead?
Should the CPU properties be registered somewhere else?
--
Eduardo
