On 05/30/13 13:07, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > /* PC hardware initialisation */ > static void pc_init1(MemoryRegion *system_memory, > @@ -122,6 +122,7 @@ static void pc_init1(MemoryRegion *system_memory, > } > > guest_info = pc_guest_info_init(below_4g_mem_size, above_4g_mem_size); > + guest_info->compat_v1_5 = guest_info_compat_v1_5;
I believe I can see the advantage of delaying this "compat_v1_5" until init-done-notifier time: init code gradually building up / rewriting guest_info doesn't have to tiptoe around conditions. Style: would it be worth passing "guest_info_compat_v1_5" as a parameter to pc_guest_info_init()? Currently you have an _init() function that partially initializes the struct, and right after _init() returns you fill in what's still missing form basic initialization. No more comments for the series. Thanks, Laszlo
