Am 25.06.2015 um 04:17 schrieb Zhu Guihua: > Add a wrapper to specify reset order when registering reset handler, > instead of non-obvious initiazation code ordering.
"initialization", and this sentence is not really telling to me. What issue is this solving or, more likely, working around? In the next patch the APIC is being moved from ICC bus (which, as it has a device parent, would seem to not register its own reset handler in qdev.c) to no bus and thus seemingly no implicit reset handler either. We've been trying to get away from reset handlers and move to reset callbacks that propagate through devices and buses for a long time. This patch feels like a step backwards. If there is indeed no simpler solution, this at least deserves a better justification. If more people start using values like 0x1, we'll have the same ordering issues unless we use some global enum to coordinate them. > > Signed-off-by: Zhu Guihua <zhugh.f...@cn.fujitsu.com> > --- > include/hw/hw.h | 4 ++++ > vl.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++- > 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) Regards, Andreas -- SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Dilip Upmanyu, Graham Norton; HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
