Am 23.01.2013 14:41, schrieb Peter Maydell:
> On 23 January 2013 13:38, Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote:
>> Am 23.01.2013 14:03, schrieb Peter Maydell:
>>> On 23 January 2013 12:07, Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote:
>>>> + if (cpu_model == NULL) {
>>>> + return NULL;
>>>> + }
>>>
>>> explicit "== NULL" is kind of ugly; established style in
>>> target-arm/ is "if (!cpu_model)..."
>>
>> I consistently use !foo only if foo is bool. Any decent compiler will
>> optimize this appropriately.
>
> Yes -- I prefer (!ptr) not because I think the code will be different
> but because I think it is better style (and consistent with the
> current code -- there are no instances of "== NULL" in target-arm
> today).
Please see style-changed version here:
https://github.com/afaerber/qemu-cpu/commits/qom-cpu-types
https://github.com/afaerber/qemu-cpu/commit/726554290fa69425d0e94e2e4fd2fdfeeb54e00c
>>> Is this a class method because the plan is that eventually
>>> the code that instantiates the CPU object will become
>>> generic rather than target specific?
>>
>> Yes, the plan as indicated in the CPUState realizefn series is to
>> generalize cpu_init() so that it only needs to know which base type to
>> operate on. I'm not yet sure how to handle CPU properties in a generic
>> way, but said series got three or four targets into a generic QOM'ish
>> form already.
https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2013-01/msg03606.html
> Cool.
Preview of rebased CPU realizefn here:
https://github.com/afaerber/qemu-cpu/commits/qom-cpu-realize
Andreas
--
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg
