On 18/07/2020 09.09, Pratik Parvati wrote:
> Hi team,
>
> Could someone please guild me to understand the difference
> between *instance_init()* and the*realize()* functions? The
> *class_init() *function is straight forward (it is similar to the
> constructor in C++ OOP); But
> On 18 Jul 2020, at 12:43, Peter Maydell wrote:
>
> Note that for a lot
> of device state struct members (where they correspond to guest
> registers state), you want to set their values in the
> device's reset method, not in instance_init or realize.
> That's because the guest-visible registe
On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 at 09:27, Liviu Ionescu wrote:
> For me it was difficult to draw a line of what initialisations should be done
> in .instance_init and what in .realize, but given that .realise is called
> when the whole hierarchy is ready, it might do links between objects, which
> are not
> On 18 Jul 2020, at 10:09, Pratik Parvati wrote:
>
> The class_init() function is straight forward (it is similar to the
> constructor in C++ OOP
The C++ constructor initialises class **instances**, i.e. C++ objects, not C++
classes.
In QEMU, the OOP functionality is implemented with nest
Hi team,
Could someone please guild me to understand the difference between
*instance_init()* and the* realize()* functions? The *class_init() *function
is straight forward (it is similar to the constructor in C++ OOP); But I
am, finding hard to quote the difference between *instance_init()* and
