On Wed, 30 Aug 2017 19:05:56 +0200 David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Some time ago we discussed that using "id" as property name is not the > right thing to do, as it is a reserved property for other devices. > > Switch to the term "addr" instead, which matches the definition in the > PoP called "CPU address". There is no such thing as cpu number, so > rename env.cpu_num to env.cpu_addr. > > We can get rid of cpu->id now. Keep cpu->index and env->cpu_addr in sync. > cpu->index was already implicitly used by e.g. cpu_exists(), so keeping > both in sync seems to be the right thing to do. > > cpu->index will now no longer automatically get set via > cpu_exec_realizefn(). For now, we were lucky that both implicitly stayed > in sync. > > Our new cpu property "addr" can be a static property. Range checks can > be avoided by using the correct type and the "setting after realized" > check is done implicitly. > > AFAIK, s390x only supports cpu_add and not device_add for cpus. So we > should be able to safely rename that property (no the "id" property > could properly be used for device_add, which needs an artificial id for > identification purposes). I cannot parse the sentence in the brackets... > > Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com> > --- > hw/s390x/s390-virtio-ccw.c | 2 +- > target/s390x/cpu.c | 69 > ++++++++++++---------------------------------- > target/s390x/cpu.h | 5 ++-- > target/s390x/cpu_models.c | 2 +- > target/s390x/excp_helper.c | 2 +- > target/s390x/helper.c | 4 +-- > target/s390x/misc_helper.c | 4 +-- > target/s390x/translate.c | 5 +--- > 8 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 65 deletions(-) ...the patch seems fine, though :)
