On Mon, 11 Dec 2017 14:47:29 +0100
David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com> wrote:
> This makes it clearer, which device is used for which accelerator.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com>
> ---
> hw/intc/s390_flic.c | 9 +++++++--
> hw/intc/s390_flic_kvm.c | 12 ------------
> include/hw/s390x/s390_flic.h | 9 ---------
> 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/intc/s390_flic.c b/hw/intc/s390_flic.c
> index 6eaf178d79..a78bdf1d90 100644
> --- a/hw/intc/s390_flic.c
> +++ b/hw/intc/s390_flic.c
> @@ -40,11 +40,16 @@ void s390_flic_init(void)
> {
> DeviceState *dev;
>
> - dev = s390_flic_kvm_create();
> - if (!dev) {
> + if (kvm_enabled()) {
> + dev = qdev_create(NULL, TYPE_KVM_S390_FLIC);
> + object_property_add_child(qdev_get_machine(), TYPE_KVM_S390_FLIC,
> + OBJECT(dev), NULL);
> + } else if (tcg_enabled()) {
> dev = qdev_create(NULL, TYPE_QEMU_S390_FLIC);
> object_property_add_child(qdev_get_machine(), TYPE_QEMU_S390_FLIC,
> OBJECT(dev), NULL);
Can you use TYPE_S390_FLIC_COMMON for attaching the flic to the machine?
> + } else {
> + g_assert_not_reached();
Checking for tcg_enabled() explicitly does not seem the common pattern,
although it is fine with me (I doubt we'll support other accelerators
for s390x in the foreseeable future).
> }
> qdev_init_nofail(dev);
> }
Do we want to switch to the same pattern for the storage attribute
device as well?
Change looks fine to me.
