On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 01:25:09PM +0100, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Tue, 6 Dec 2016 17:31:59 -0200 > Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > What about this? > > > > (untested) > > Have not tested it either, but I think it looks good. Some nits below.
Thanks! > > > > > Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> > > --- > > hw/core/machine.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > > 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > @@ -565,10 +584,20 @@ void machine_register_compat_props(MachineState > > *machine) > > } > > > > for (i = 0; i < mc->compat_props->len; i++) { > > + ObjectClass *oc; > > Move the declaration out of the loop? I will do it on v2. > > > p = g_array_index(mc->compat_props, GlobalProperty *, i); > > - /* Machine compat_props must never cause errors: */ > > - p->errp = &error_abort; > > - qdev_prop_register_global(p); > > + oc = object_class_by_name(p->driver); > > + if (oc && object_class_is_abstract(oc)) { > > + /* temporary hack to make sure we will never override > > + * globals set explicitly on -global: if an abstract class > > + * is on compat_props, register globals for each of their > > + * subclasses instead. > > + */ > > I think this should not just be a 'temporary hack'... rather document > this behaviour for abstract classes? I'm not sure. I believe the translation from abstract superclass to subclasses just emulates the behavior implemented by Greg Kurz at "qdev: fix the order compat and global properties are applied" in a more complicated way (and only for compat_props, not for -global). This hack specifically would not be enough because it affects only compat_props, and still behaves in a weird way when non-abstract classes have subclasses. > > > + object_class_foreach(machine_register_compat_for_subclass, > > + p->driver, false, p); > > + } else { > > + register_compat_prop(p->driver, p->property, p->value); > > + } > > } > > } > > > -- Eduardo