On 16/11/2020 14.25, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > Hi Gan, > > On 11/15/20 7:49 PM, Gan Qixin wrote: >> Some peripherals of bcm2835 cprman have no category, put them into the 'misc' >> category. >> >> Signed-off-by: Gan Qixin <ganqi...@huawei.com> >> --- >> Cc: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4...@amsat.org> >> --- >> hw/misc/bcm2835_cprman.c | 4 ++++ >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/hw/misc/bcm2835_cprman.c b/hw/misc/bcm2835_cprman.c >> index 7e415a017c..c62958a99e 100644 >> --- a/hw/misc/bcm2835_cprman.c >> +++ b/hw/misc/bcm2835_cprman.c >> @@ -136,6 +136,7 @@ static void pll_class_init(ObjectClass *klass, void >> *data) >> >> dc->reset = pll_reset; >> dc->vmsd = &pll_vmstate; >> + set_bit(DEVICE_CATEGORY_MISC, dc->categories); > > Well, this is not an usable device but a part of a bigger device, > so here we want the opposite: not list this device in any category. > > Maybe we could add a DEVICE_CATEGORY_COMPOSITE for all such QOM > types so management apps can filter them out? (And so we are sure > all QOM is classified). > > Thomas, you already dealt with categorizing devices in the past, > what do you think about this? Who else could help? Maybe add > someone from libvirt in the thread?
My 0.02 € : Mark the device as user_creatable = false if it can not really be used by the user with the -device CLI parameter. Then it also does not need a category. I know Markus will likely have a different opinion, but in my eyes it's just ugly if we present devices to the users that they can not use. (By the way, this device here seems to be a decendant of TYPE_SYS_BUS_DEVICE ... shouldn't these show up as user_creatable = false automatically?) Thomas
