On 11.12.2017 18:17, Cornelia Huck wrote:
> 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?
I suggest doing that in a separate patch. (I remember that changing the
name should not harm migration).
>
>> + } 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).
Indeed, I can drop that.
>
>> }
>> qdev_init_nofail(dev);
>> }
>
> Do we want to switch to the same pattern for the storage attribute
> device as well?
Yes, can have a look, thanks!
>
> Change looks fine to me.
>
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
