On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 06:01:31PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 29/07/20 16:32, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 29, 2020 at 11:54:35AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >> On 29/07/20 00:47, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > [...] > >>> Do we really need need QOM children to be accessible using the QOM > >>> property API? > >>> > >>> Using the same code for both user-configurable properties and for > >>> the list of children of a QOM object might have saved some time > >>> years ago, but I'm not sure this is still a necessary or useful > >>> abstraction. > >> > >> The main thing we get from it is that the QOM paths treat children and > >> links the same, and links are properties. To be honest it's not a > >> feature that is very much developed, so perhaps we can remove it but we > >> need to evaluate the impact of losing it. > > > > Are link properties usable by -device/device_add/-object/object-add? > > Not sure exactly what you mean, but there is DEFINE_PROP_LINK and it's > used to link devices to objects. Is it ever used with an actual path > rather than just the id of something in /objects? Probably not.
I mean: are link properties settable from the command line or QMP, as an argument to -device/device_add/-object/object-add? -- Eduardo
