On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 16:21:56 +0100 Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote:
> Am 24.02.2012 15:56, schrieb Luiz Capitulino: > > On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 15:23:43 +0100 > > Andreas Färber <afaer...@suse.de> wrote: > > > >> Am 24.02.2012 15:13, schrieb Luiz Capitulino: > >>> Signed-off-by: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitul...@redhat.com> > >> > >> Unless this fixes a bug, I'd rather not refactor this as in my head this > >> is already just object_class_foreach() / object_class_by_name(), similar > >> to CPUs on my qom-cpu branch. > > > > Is there a plan to convert this to qom anytime soon? > > I was planning to look into it after CPU is done, if no one beats me. > Since CPU will touch on the machine init functions, doing both in > parallel did not seem like a good idea to me. > > I consider both CPU and machine 1.1 material - if we can agree on the > way there, then the code you are changing here will not see a release. > It certainly doesn't hurt to commit it though. :) Well, if you're already planning to do it I can drop the patch then.