On 16 December 2013 08:48, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: > Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org> writes: >> I kind of think this whole thing is backwards anyway: >> we should really say "the user can only instantiate >> devices via command line or monitor that are specifically >> intended to be hot-pluggable", rather than having an >> enormous list of devices we flag as not instantiable >> by the user. Even if someday we manage to make it technically >> possible to instantiate an omap_i2c device (say) from the >> command line, it will still be a completely bizarre thing to do >> because it's only intended to work as a part of the omap SoC. > > "Hot-pluggable" doesn't apply here. There are plenty of devices that > can only be cold-plugged, yet are absolutely meant to be user-pluggable. > Real ISA cards, for instance.
Mmm. Just plain "pluggable" would be more what I meant: modelling something that on real hardware is really a simple pluggable socket. > However, the current code lets users plug absolutely everything, even > stuff that is known not to work. The code still has the remnants of a > mechanism meant to protect users from known-not-to-work plugs, but it > got broken some time ago. My "Clean up and fix no_user" series fixes > that regression in a way that's hopefully agreeable with Anthony, who > has been quite insistent on letting device_add plug more rather than > less. This series merely patches some holes on top. > > The list of non-pluggable devices may be larger than the list of > pluggable ones, but: I count just 48 instances of > "cannot_instantiate_with_device_add_yet = true". I doubt marking > devices that can be plugged instead of the ones than can't be would take > fewer marks. Moreover, each one comes with a comment explaining *why* > the device cannot be plugged. Sure nice to have when such a "why" goes > away. Some of them are expected to go away eventually. I would expect 99% of actually pluggable devices to be pluggable because they're using a pluggable bus: ISA, PCI, USB, ... Anyway, I don't actively object to this series. I just think Anthony's going in the wrong direction which is why I haven't been particularly eager to actively mark it as reviewed-by me either... thanks -- PMM