On Sun, Dec 23, 2012 at 02:34:21PM -0600, Anthony Liguori wrote: > Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com> writes: > > > v2: > > * Naming changes: > > - s/visit_type_uint_suffixed_int/visit_type_suffixed_int/ > > - use 'suffix_factor' instead of 'unit' > > * Added documentation to visit_type_suffixed_int() > > * Fixed errp check. > > * Style fixes > > This is not how visitors are supposed to be used. > > Just treat tsc_freq as a string property and parse it in the setter.
So, why visit_type_size() does exist? Should we work to eliminate it? If not, why is it different from a "frequency" type? -- Eduardo
