On 07/12/2015 09:50, Markus Armbruster wrote: > The device is obviously useful. However, there is dissent on how it > ought to be modelled. The modelling is visible at the -device user > interface. By making the device available there in 2.5, we commit to > the current modelling's user interface before we reach consensus on how > it ought to be modelled. Options: > > (1) Make device "sdhci-pci" unavailable with -device until we reach > consensus. This is what we normally do. Trivial patch is on list. > > (2) Mark the properties that belong to the card rather than the > controller as experimental until we reach consensus, by prefixing > their name with "x-". Needs a patch. > > (3) Keep it available, commit to the user interface, deal with the > consequences if and when they arise. > > I think (1) is the most prudent, but (2) should work, too. Having dealt > with consequences of prior modelling mistakes, I dislike 3.
There have been 10 commits in 2 years to sd.c, none of them getting a step closer to qdev-ification basically. So there's no interest, which is basically explained by the fact that quite frankly SDIO is dead. I don't see any real difference between sdhci-pci and pci-serial. Paolo
