> I hope that through the recent series sent on multi target topic, you
> can see better how to try to slice work in smaller pieces. I try to
> focus on having a clear goal for each series, and each patch has a
> unique purpose. Then wait for reviews, and iterate from here.
I have learned much, I need more information or discussion about thow to
avoid calling target_info() in class_init. You suggest me to use is_available
but I still did not get it, because for multi-target binary, the is_available
will not be called. so adding more things into is_available is
useless(for my target).
So I want a more clean explanation of how to do that. (I have already
tried rename/duplicate
the QOM name with is_available, too much changes and cumbersome)
I have an idea is maybe add a function
void object_class_property_set_targets(ObjectClass *klass, const char
*name, uint64_t targets);
so that that property is only available on that list of targets
>
> For now, I'm focused on having the rest of base architectures in multi
> target, and don't plan to touch on "single binary" topic anytime soon.
> But I feel progress can be made on both sides, as they don't touch on
> the same things, single-binary being oriented towards machines/cpus and
> command line, while multi-target mostly touches target code.
>
> There is still room for you if you want to progress on single-binary.
>
> Regards,
> Pierrick
--
此致
礼
罗勇刚
Yours
sincerely,
Yonggang Luo
