Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> writes: > Am 19.08.2013 11:35, schrieb Markus Armbruster: >> Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> writes: >> >>> Am 16.08.2013 15:18, schrieb arm...@redhat.com: >>>> From: Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> >>>> >>>> I'd like to access QEMUMachine from a QEMUMachine init() method, which >>>> is currently not possible. Instead of passing it as an argument, I >>>> simply set current_machine earlier. >>> >>> We had such a patch for CPU hot-add and decided against doing this. >>> Currently current_machine != signals that it has been initialized. And >> >> Does any code actually depend on this undocumented condition? I found >> none. > > I didn't audit. Currently the users are limited to vl.c itself, > device-hotplug.c for block_default_type and qmp.c for hot_add_cpu. pc.c > feels odd in that mix. > > [...] >>> Can't you pass either QEMUMachine or the specific fields needed from PC >>> code to those SMBIOS functions? You did add a bool argument. >> >> Can't see how to do that without passing the machine to QEMUMachine >> method init(), which involves touching all boards. I doubt that's a >> good idea, but if you insist, I can do it. > > Isn't that exactly what QEMUMachineArgs was meant to address? :) > Had a look at your don't-explode patches and they looked good.
I could give it a try, but to be honest, I'm reluctant to base new work on a series that has been ignored by all committers for more than two months.
