Hi Paolo,
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 5:36 PM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Il 21/06/2013 06:21, Peter Crosthwaite ha scritto:
>> diff --git a/hw/timer/xilinx_timer.c b/hw/timer/xilinx_timer.c
>> index 0c39cff..ae09170 100644
>> --- a/hw/timer/xilinx_timer.c
>> +++ b/hw/timer/xilinx_timer.c
>> @@ -218,7 +218,7 @@ static int xilinx_timer_init(SysBusDevice *dev)
>> ptimer_set_freq(xt->ptimer, t->freq_hz);
>> }
>>
>> - memory_region_init_io(&t->mmio, &timer_ops, t, "xlnx.xps-timer",
>> + memory_region_init_io(&t->mmio, &timer_ops, t, TYPE_XILINX_TIMER,
>> R_MAX * 4 * num_timers(t));
>> sysbus_init_mmio(dev, &t->mmio);
>> return 0;
>> @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ static void xilinx_timer_class_init(ObjectClass
>
> Isn't this a false positive?
>
Not really,
For consistency I just the TYPE_FOO for the memory region name, so I
don't see why that shouldn't be macrofiied along with the rest. It is
quite deliberately the same - please advise if this is wrong. Same for
the VMSD name.
Slightly off topic, should we perhaps use the object canonical patch
for the device as the memory region name string?:
- memory_region_init_io(&t->mmio, &timer_ops, t, "xlnx.xps-timer",
+ memory_region_init_io(&t->mmio, &timer_ops, t,
object_get_canonical_path(OBJECT(dev)),
R_MAX * 4 * num_timers(t));
Its unambiguous and solves the problem where you have two-of-a-kind
devices in the one system and you need to differentiate.
Regards,
Peter
> Paolo
>
