> >> >> > I've been considering a machine config file for a while, but > >> >> > haven't come up with a coherent way of representing everything yet. > >> > >> I'm glad this discussion was brought up on the list. And I'd like > >> to also bring back another related issue - what about providing > >> "plugin" system for device (chip) implementation, in addition to > >> flexible-format machine config allowing to construct "virtual boards" > >> out of them? > > > > IMHO we already have a fairly good device model, and it's not hard to add > > new devices. > > Maybe. But where are new chips in qemu?
You mean like m68k I just committed, and sh4 that got added not so long ago? Or the LSI SCSI emulation? Or the PCnet and rtl8139 NIC emulation? > Why there're still only 2 ARM boards? It's actually 3 (another with 2 minor variants of those boards), and there are at least 3 other (incomplete) ports have been posted on the list but not merged. > How do I "stick" wi-fi card in one of them? Huh? Same way you add any other device. Call the init function and get it to register its resources. > So the concern > is not just if it's easy to add new devices or not, but if there're means > to actually support appearance and growth of device library. Plugin system > would be a "decree" that there's a stable API to define devices and > welcome for 3rd-party developers to develop them. > > And well, patching source is not really that easy a way to "add new > devices". I don't believe that. Adding 2 lines to a Makefile is probably easier than building an independent plugin. Paul _______________________________________________ Qemu-devel mailing list Qemu-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel