On Fri, 31 May 2019 11:15:01 +0300
Michael Rolnik <mrol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Igor.
>
> Please explain what I should do.
Maybe look at inline comments which are somewhere in the body of reply.
> thank you,
> Michael
>
> On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 11:02 AM Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 30 May 2019 22:07:31 +0300
> > Michael Rolnik <mrol...@gmail.com> wrote:
[...]
> > > +static ObjectClass *avr_cpu_class_by_name(const char *cpu_model)
> > > +{
> > > + ObjectClass *oc;
> > > + char *name;
> > > +
> > > + if (!cpu_model) {
> > > + return NULL;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + oc = object_class_by_name(cpu_model);
> > > + if (oc != NULL && object_class_dynamic_cast(oc, TYPE_AVR_CPU) !=
> > NULL &&
> > > + !object_class_is_abstract(oc)) {
> > > + return oc;
> > > + }
> >
> > In other targets QEMU has 1-2 or more naming variants but that were
> > influenced
> > by legacy code and we have to keep compatibility not to break existing
> > configurations.
> >
> > In case of new cpu, I'd keep only above hunk and drop the rest so that
> > only one naming scheme would be available, which is compatible with
> > '-device' naming and QMP/monitor interfaces that we support.
> >
I've suggested to leave only above hunk and drop following hunk.
this way only full cpu type name will be accepted by '-cpu'
> > > + name = g_strdup_printf(AVR_CPU_TYPE_NAME("%s"), cpu_model);
> > > + oc = object_class_by_name(name);
> > > + g_free(name);
> > > + if (oc != NULL && object_class_dynamic_cast(oc, TYPE_AVR_CPU) !=
> > NULL &&
> > > + !object_class_is_abstract(oc)) {
> > > + return oc;
> > > + }
since suffix trick will be removed, you'll probably need to
amend/simplify avr_cpu_list_entry() as well.
> > > + return NULL;
> > > +}
> > > +
[...]
