On Fri, 5 Aug 2022, BALATON Zoltan wrote:
On Fri, 5 Aug 2022, Peter Maydell wrote:
On Fri, 5 Aug 2022 at 17:50, BALATON Zoltan <bala...@eik.bme.hu> wrote:
This also
allows to get the cpu without a link with something like:
PPC4XX_MACHINE(current_machine /* or qdev_get_machine() */)->soc.cpu
...and now you have device code that's making assumptions about
the machine and SoC it's in.
Since these devices are strictly part of this SoC making this asumption
should be OK. Making assumption about the machine may be a valid argument
although this series already makes that asumption for 405 machines by
introducing the machine state class. We need a way to share these device
models between 4xx mahines so I think some assumptions will proabbly be
needed.
By the way the assumption that we have a machine with a soc object is only
there because there seems to be no way to get from an object to its parent
which is strange. The soc would simply be OBJECT(dev)->parent as these
devices have to be in the soc beacuse they are part of that model but
those Object fields are marked private (some places so access it
nevertheless).but there's no function to get them. MemoryRegion has its
own version. Why do we have these objects in a tree if there's no way to
navigate it?
Regards,
BALATON Zoltan
