Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: > On 5 May 2016 at 11:38, 赵小强 <zxq_yx_...@163.com> wrote: >> At 2016-03-29 15:47:19, "xiaoqiang zhao" <zxq_yx_...@163.com> wrote: >>>This patch set trys to QOM'ify hw/char files, see commit messages >>>for more details >>> >>>Changes in v2: >>>* rename TYPE_SCLP_LM_CONSOLE to TYPE_SCLPLM_CONSOLE which is suggested by >>> Cornelia Huck <cornelia.h...@de.ibm.com> >>>* rebase on the current master >>> >>>xiaoqiang zhao (6): >>> hw/char: QOM'ify escc.c >>> hw/char: QOM'ify etraxfs_ser.c >>> hw/char: QOM'ify lm32_juart.c >>> hw/char: QOM'ify lm32_uart.c >>> hw/char: QOM'ify sclpconsole-lm.c >>> hw/char: QOM'ify sclpconsole.c >>> >>> hw/char/escc.c | 12 +++++------- >>> hw/char/etraxfs_ser.c | 11 +++++------ >>> hw/char/lm32_juart.c | 9 +++------ >>> hw/char/lm32_uart.c | 12 +++++------- >>> hw/char/sclpconsole-lm.c | 14 +++++++++----- >>> hw/char/sclpconsole.c | 12 ++++++++---- >>> 6 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-) >>> >>>-- >>>2.1.4 >>> >> >> ping ??? > > I think you will have better luck if you rearrange all these > QOM patches so that you provide them as one series per board > or per target architecture, not one per type of device. > There is no single person with responsibility for "all of > hw/char" so structuring your cleanup patchsets like this will > tend to result in the people who might care about the devices > not looking at them. (Also you can concentrate on the devices > which are actively maintained, like ARM ones, x86 ones, MIPS > and SPARC ones, rather than the oddballs semi-orphaned ones > like lm32, CRIS, etc.)
But please don't throw away your cleanups for the oddballs just yet. Unloved code keeping obsolete internal interfaces alive is a problem worth reducing.
