| Message ID | 1450436632-23980-4-git-send-email-caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 18/12/2015 12:03, Cao jin wrote: > Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> > --- > hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c | 24 ++++++++++++++---------- > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c b/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c > index 57f8a37..cc975f6 100644 > --- a/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c > +++ b/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c > @@ -145,19 +145,19 @@ static const TypeInfo pxb_host_info = { > * Returns 0 on successs, -1 if i440fx host was not > * found or the bus number is already in use. > */ > -static int pxb_register_bus(PCIDevice *dev, PCIBus *pxb_bus) > +static int pxb_register_bus(PCIDevice *dev, PCIBus *pxb_bus, Error **errp) > { > PCIBus *bus = dev->bus; > int pxb_bus_num = pci_bus_num(pxb_bus); > > if (bus->parent_dev) { > - error_report("PXB devices can be attached only to root bus."); > + error_setg(errp, "PXB devices can be attached only to root bus."); > return -1; > } > > QLIST_FOREACH(bus, &bus->child, sibling) { > if (pci_bus_num(bus) == pxb_bus_num) { > - error_report("Bus %d is already in use.", pxb_bus_num); > + error_setg(errp, "Bus %d is already in use.", pxb_bus_num); > return -1; > } > } > @@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ static gint pxb_compare(gconstpointer a, gconstpointer b) > 0; > } > > -static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) > +static void pxb_dev_realize(PCIDevice *dev, Error **errp) > { > PXBDev *pxb = PXB_DEV(dev); > DeviceState *ds, *bds; > @@ -202,8 +202,8 @@ static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) > > if (pxb->numa_node != NUMA_NODE_UNASSIGNED && > pxb->numa_node >= nb_numa_nodes) { > - error_report("Illegal numa node %d.", pxb->numa_node); > - return -EINVAL; > + error_setg(errp, "Illegal numa node %d.", pxb->numa_node); > + return; > } > > if (dev->qdev.id && *dev->qdev.id) { > @@ -225,8 +225,8 @@ static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) > > PCI_HOST_BRIDGE(ds)->bus = bus; > > - if (pxb_register_bus(dev, bus)) { > - return -EINVAL; > + if (pxb_register_bus(dev, bus, errp)) { > + goto err_register_bus; > } > > qdev_init_nofail(ds); > @@ -237,7 +237,11 @@ static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) > pci_config_set_class(dev->config, PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_HOST); > > pxb_dev_list = g_list_insert_sorted(pxb_dev_list, pxb, pxb_compare); > - return 0; > + > +err_register_bus: > + object_unref(OBJECT(ds)); > + object_unref(OBJECT(bds)); > + object_unref(OBJECT(bus)); I think these should be object_unparent, not unref. Paolo > } > > static void pxb_dev_exitfn(PCIDevice *pci_dev) > @@ -259,7 +263,7 @@ static void pxb_dev_class_init(ObjectClass *klass, void *data) > DeviceClass *dc = DEVICE_CLASS(klass); > PCIDeviceClass *k = PCI_DEVICE_CLASS(klass); > > - k->init = pxb_dev_initfn; > + k->realize = pxb_dev_realize; > k->exit = pxb_dev_exitfn; > k->vendor_id = PCI_VENDOR_ID_REDHAT; > k->device_id = PCI_DEVICE_ID_REDHAT_PXB; >
Hi, On 12/18/2015 01:03 PM, Cao jin wrote: > Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> > --- > hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c | 24 ++++++++++++++---------- > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c b/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c > index 57f8a37..cc975f6 100644 > --- a/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c > +++ b/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c > @@ -145,19 +145,19 @@ static const TypeInfo pxb_host_info = { > * Returns 0 on successs, -1 if i440fx host was not > * found or the bus number is already in use. > */ > -static int pxb_register_bus(PCIDevice *dev, PCIBus *pxb_bus) > +static int pxb_register_bus(PCIDevice *dev, PCIBus *pxb_bus, Error **errp) If you add an err parameter, maybe the function should return void. > { > PCIBus *bus = dev->bus; > int pxb_bus_num = pci_bus_num(pxb_bus); > > if (bus->parent_dev) { > - error_report("PXB devices can be attached only to root bus."); > + error_setg(errp, "PXB devices can be attached only to root bus."); > return -1; > } > > QLIST_FOREACH(bus, &bus->child, sibling) { > if (pci_bus_num(bus) == pxb_bus_num) { > - error_report("Bus %d is already in use.", pxb_bus_num); > + error_setg(errp, "Bus %d is already in use.", pxb_bus_num); > return -1; > } > } > @@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ static gint pxb_compare(gconstpointer a, gconstpointer b) > 0; > } > > -static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) > +static void pxb_dev_realize(PCIDevice *dev, Error **errp) > { > PXBDev *pxb = PXB_DEV(dev); > DeviceState *ds, *bds; > @@ -202,8 +202,8 @@ static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) > > if (pxb->numa_node != NUMA_NODE_UNASSIGNED && > pxb->numa_node >= nb_numa_nodes) { > - error_report("Illegal numa node %d.", pxb->numa_node); > - return -EINVAL; > + error_setg(errp, "Illegal numa node %d.", pxb->numa_node); > + return; > } > > if (dev->qdev.id && *dev->qdev.id) { > @@ -225,8 +225,8 @@ static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) > > PCI_HOST_BRIDGE(ds)->bus = bus; > > - if (pxb_register_bus(dev, bus)) { > - return -EINVAL; > + if (pxb_register_bus(dev, bus, errp)) { > + goto err_register_bus; > } > > qdev_init_nofail(ds); > @@ -237,7 +237,11 @@ static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) > pci_config_set_class(dev->config, PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_HOST); > > pxb_dev_list = g_list_insert_sorted(pxb_dev_list, pxb, pxb_compare); > - return 0; > + > +err_register_bus: > + object_unref(OBJECT(ds)); > + object_unref(OBJECT(bds)); > + object_unref(OBJECT(bus)); The order should be in the reverse order of creation: bds, bus, ds > } > > static void pxb_dev_exitfn(PCIDevice *pci_dev) > @@ -259,7 +263,7 @@ static void pxb_dev_class_init(ObjectClass *klass, void *data) > DeviceClass *dc = DEVICE_CLASS(klass); > PCIDeviceClass *k = PCI_DEVICE_CLASS(klass); > > - k->init = pxb_dev_initfn; > + k->realize = pxb_dev_realize; > k->exit = pxb_dev_exitfn; If init is converted to realize, maybe the exit should be converted to unrealize? Thanks, Marcel > k->vendor_id = PCI_VENDOR_ID_REDHAT; > k->device_id = PCI_DEVICE_ID_REDHAT_PXB; >
Hi, On 12/20/2015 06:22 PM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: > > Hi, > > On 12/18/2015 01:03 PM, Cao jin wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> >> --- >> hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c | 24 ++++++++++++++---------- >> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c >> b/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c >> index 57f8a37..cc975f6 100644 >> --- a/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c >> +++ b/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c >> @@ -145,19 +145,19 @@ static const TypeInfo pxb_host_info = { >> * Returns 0 on successs, -1 if i440fx host was not >> * found or the bus number is already in use. >> */ >> -static int pxb_register_bus(PCIDevice *dev, PCIBus *pxb_bus) >> +static int pxb_register_bus(PCIDevice *dev, PCIBus *pxb_bus, Error >> **errp) > > If you add an err parameter, maybe the function should return void. > Ok, will modify it in V2. Actually, both style are fine with me:) > >> { >> PCIBus *bus = dev->bus; >> int pxb_bus_num = pci_bus_num(pxb_bus); >> >> if (bus->parent_dev) { >> - error_report("PXB devices can be attached only to root bus."); >> + error_setg(errp, "PXB devices can be attached only to root >> bus."); >> return -1; >> } >> >> QLIST_FOREACH(bus, &bus->child, sibling) { >> if (pci_bus_num(bus) == pxb_bus_num) { >> - error_report("Bus %d is already in use.", pxb_bus_num); >> + error_setg(errp, "Bus %d is already in use.", pxb_bus_num); >> return -1; >> } >> } >> @@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ static gint pxb_compare(gconstpointer a, >> gconstpointer b) >> 0; >> } >> >> -static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) >> +static void pxb_dev_realize(PCIDevice *dev, Error **errp) >> { >> PXBDev *pxb = PXB_DEV(dev); >> DeviceState *ds, *bds; >> @@ -202,8 +202,8 @@ static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) >> >> if (pxb->numa_node != NUMA_NODE_UNASSIGNED && >> pxb->numa_node >= nb_numa_nodes) { >> - error_report("Illegal numa node %d.", pxb->numa_node); >> - return -EINVAL; >> + error_setg(errp, "Illegal numa node %d.", pxb->numa_node); >> + return; >> } >> >> if (dev->qdev.id && *dev->qdev.id) { >> @@ -225,8 +225,8 @@ static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) >> >> PCI_HOST_BRIDGE(ds)->bus = bus; >> >> - if (pxb_register_bus(dev, bus)) { >> - return -EINVAL; >> + if (pxb_register_bus(dev, bus, errp)) { >> + goto err_register_bus; >> } >> >> qdev_init_nofail(ds); >> @@ -237,7 +237,11 @@ static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) >> pci_config_set_class(dev->config, PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_HOST); >> >> pxb_dev_list = g_list_insert_sorted(pxb_dev_list, pxb, >> pxb_compare); >> - return 0; >> + >> +err_register_bus: >> + object_unref(OBJECT(ds)); >> + object_unref(OBJECT(bds)); >> + object_unref(OBJECT(bus)); > > > The order should be in the reverse order of creation: > bds, bus, ds > Ok, I can do that. But it seems the order here doesn`t matter? Is there dependency among these three? > >> } >> >> static void pxb_dev_exitfn(PCIDevice *pci_dev) >> @@ -259,7 +263,7 @@ static void pxb_dev_class_init(ObjectClass *klass, >> void *data) >> DeviceClass *dc = DEVICE_CLASS(klass); >> PCIDeviceClass *k = PCI_DEVICE_CLASS(klass); >> >> - k->init = pxb_dev_initfn; >> + k->realize = pxb_dev_realize; >> k->exit = pxb_dev_exitfn; > > If init is converted to realize, maybe the exit should be converted to > unrealize? > Yup, I agree with you from the point that the names should be antonym. But it seems there is no PCIDeviceClass.unrealize:( And I am also not aware why there is no comment for .exit while there is for .init. It is appreciated if somebody could tell me the history O:-) > > Thanks, > Marcel > >> k->vendor_id = PCI_VENDOR_ID_REDHAT; >> k->device_id = PCI_DEVICE_ID_REDHAT_PXB; >> > > > > . >
On 12/20/2015 12:48 PM, Cao jin wrote: > Hi, > > On 12/20/2015 06:22 PM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> On 12/18/2015 01:03 PM, Cao jin wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> >>> --- >>> hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c | 24 ++++++++++++++---------- >>> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c >>> b/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c >>> index 57f8a37..cc975f6 100644 >>> --- a/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c >>> +++ b/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c >>> @@ -145,19 +145,19 @@ static const TypeInfo pxb_host_info = { >>> * Returns 0 on successs, -1 if i440fx host was not >>> * found or the bus number is already in use. >>> */ >>> -static int pxb_register_bus(PCIDevice *dev, PCIBus *pxb_bus) >>> +static int pxb_register_bus(PCIDevice *dev, PCIBus *pxb_bus, Error >>> **errp) >> >> If you add an err parameter, maybe the function should return void. >> > > Ok, will modify it in V2. Actually, both style are fine with me:) > >> >>> { >>> PCIBus *bus = dev->bus; >>> int pxb_bus_num = pci_bus_num(pxb_bus); >>> >>> if (bus->parent_dev) { >>> - error_report("PXB devices can be attached only to root bus."); >>> + error_setg(errp, "PXB devices can be attached only to root >>> bus."); >>> return -1; >>> } >>> >>> QLIST_FOREACH(bus, &bus->child, sibling) { >>> if (pci_bus_num(bus) == pxb_bus_num) { >>> - error_report("Bus %d is already in use.", pxb_bus_num); >>> + error_setg(errp, "Bus %d is already in use.", pxb_bus_num); >>> return -1; >>> } >>> } >>> @@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ static gint pxb_compare(gconstpointer a, >>> gconstpointer b) >>> 0; >>> } >>> >>> -static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) >>> +static void pxb_dev_realize(PCIDevice *dev, Error **errp) >>> { >>> PXBDev *pxb = PXB_DEV(dev); >>> DeviceState *ds, *bds; >>> @@ -202,8 +202,8 @@ static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) >>> >>> if (pxb->numa_node != NUMA_NODE_UNASSIGNED && >>> pxb->numa_node >= nb_numa_nodes) { >>> - error_report("Illegal numa node %d.", pxb->numa_node); >>> - return -EINVAL; >>> + error_setg(errp, "Illegal numa node %d.", pxb->numa_node); >>> + return; >>> } >>> >>> if (dev->qdev.id && *dev->qdev.id) { >>> @@ -225,8 +225,8 @@ static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) >>> >>> PCI_HOST_BRIDGE(ds)->bus = bus; >>> >>> - if (pxb_register_bus(dev, bus)) { >>> - return -EINVAL; >>> + if (pxb_register_bus(dev, bus, errp)) { >>> + goto err_register_bus; >>> } >>> >>> qdev_init_nofail(ds); >>> @@ -237,7 +237,11 @@ static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) >>> pci_config_set_class(dev->config, PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_HOST); >>> >>> pxb_dev_list = g_list_insert_sorted(pxb_dev_list, pxb, >>> pxb_compare); >>> - return 0; >>> + >>> +err_register_bus: >>> + object_unref(OBJECT(ds)); >>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bds)); >>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bus)); >> >> >> The order should be in the reverse order of creation: >> bds, bus, ds >> > > Ok, I can do that. But it seems the order here doesn`t matter? Is there dependency among these three? Yes, there is a dependency: At first the pxb host (ds) is created, then the bus (bus) is created as host's child (see pci_bus_new) and in the end a pci bridge (bds) is attached to the bus (see qdev_create). By the way, indeed you should call object_unparent at least for the pxb_host(ds), but you may want to check the others parent relationship as well. > >> >>> } >>> >>> static void pxb_dev_exitfn(PCIDevice *pci_dev) >>> @@ -259,7 +263,7 @@ static void pxb_dev_class_init(ObjectClass *klass, >>> void *data) >>> DeviceClass *dc = DEVICE_CLASS(klass); >>> PCIDeviceClass *k = PCI_DEVICE_CLASS(klass); >>> >>> - k->init = pxb_dev_initfn; >>> + k->realize = pxb_dev_realize; >>> k->exit = pxb_dev_exitfn; >> >> If init is converted to realize, maybe the exit should be converted to >> unrealize? >> > > Yup, I agree with you from the point that the names should be antonym. But it seems there is no PCIDeviceClass.unrealize:( You are right. The pci_qdev_unrealize ultimately calls exit. But the same goes for init, pci_qdev_realize calls for pc->realize. This is the reason I chose to use init/exit instead of the strange realize/exit. But since the intention is to get rid of init, I am not against it. > > And I am also not aware why there is no comment for .exit while there is for .init. It is appreciated if somebody could tell me the history O:-) I'll add Markus, Andreas and Michael (the PCI maintainer), maybe they have a better insight to this. On the other hand you should continue with the patch and leave the "unrealize" until we'll know more :) Thanks, Marcel > >> >> Thanks, >> Marcel >> >>> k->vendor_id = PCI_VENDOR_ID_REDHAT; >>> k->device_id = PCI_DEVICE_ID_REDHAT_PXB; >>> >> >> >> >> . >> >
Hi On 12/19/2015 02:01 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 18/12/2015 12:03, Cao jin wrote: [...] >> + >> +err_register_bus: >> + object_unref(OBJECT(ds)); >> + object_unref(OBJECT(bds)); >> + object_unref(OBJECT(bus)); > > I think these should be object_unparent, not unref. > But, it seems these 3 objects isn`t added as a child-property via object_property_add_child() during creation, so OBJECT(ds)->parent(so does the other 2) will be NULL, and so object_unparent will do nothing? Or am I missing something? > Paolo > >> } >> >> static void pxb_dev_exitfn(PCIDevice *pci_dev) >> @@ -259,7 +263,7 @@ static void pxb_dev_class_init(ObjectClass *klass, void *data) >> DeviceClass *dc = DEVICE_CLASS(klass); >> PCIDeviceClass *k = PCI_DEVICE_CLASS(klass); >> >> - k->init = pxb_dev_initfn; >> + k->realize = pxb_dev_realize; >> k->exit = pxb_dev_exitfn; >> k->vendor_id = PCI_VENDOR_ID_REDHAT; >> k->device_id = PCI_DEVICE_ID_REDHAT_PXB; >> > > > . >
On 12/20/2015 07:21 PM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: > On 12/20/2015 12:48 PM, Cao jin wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 12/20/2015 06:22 PM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: [...] >>>> + >>>> +err_register_bus: >>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(ds)); >>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bds)); >>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bus)); >>> >>> >>> The order should be in the reverse order of creation: >>> bds, bus, ds >>> >> >> Ok, I can do that. But it seems the order here doesn`t matter? Is >> there dependency among these three? > > Yes, there is a dependency: > At first the pxb host (ds) is created, then the bus (bus) is created as > host's child (see pci_bus_new) > and in the end a pci bridge (bds) is attached to the bus (see qdev_create). > Yup...thanks for reminding, I did read the code trying to find the parent relationship...but seem I didn`t read it thoroughly:-[ > By the way, indeed you should call object_unparent at least for the > pxb_host(ds), but you may want to > check the others parent relationship as well. > yes, but I think you are saying: object_unparent(bus), right? the relationship seems is: pxb host-->(child property)bus-->(link property)bds Another question: because some of this series is CCed to qemu-trivial(which means: reviewed-by?) by other maintainer, so next time, do I need to send the whole series with "v2", or the rest? >> >>> >>>> } >>>> >>>> static void pxb_dev_exitfn(PCIDevice *pci_dev) >>>> @@ -259,7 +263,7 @@ static void pxb_dev_class_init(ObjectClass *klass, >>>> void *data) >>>> DeviceClass *dc = DEVICE_CLASS(klass); >>>> PCIDeviceClass *k = PCI_DEVICE_CLASS(klass); >>>> >>>> - k->init = pxb_dev_initfn; >>>> + k->realize = pxb_dev_realize; >>>> k->exit = pxb_dev_exitfn; >>> >>> If init is converted to realize, maybe the exit should be converted to >>> unrealize? >>> >> >> Yup, I agree with you from the point that the names should be antonym. >> But it seems there is no PCIDeviceClass.unrealize:( > > You are right. The pci_qdev_unrealize ultimately calls exit. But the > same goes for init, pci_qdev_realize calls for pc->realize. > This is the reason I chose to use init/exit instead of the strange > realize/exit. > > But since the intention is to get rid of init, I am not against it. > >> >> And I am also not aware why there is no comment for .exit while there >> is for .init. It is appreciated if somebody could tell me the history >> O:-) > > I'll add Markus, Andreas and Michael (the PCI maintainer), maybe they > have a better insight to this. > > On the other hand you should continue with the patch and leave the > "unrealize" until we'll know more :) Got it;) > > Thanks, > Marcel > >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Marcel >>> >>>> k->vendor_id = PCI_VENDOR_ID_REDHAT; >>>> k->device_id = PCI_DEVICE_ID_REDHAT_PXB; >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> . >>> >> > > > > . >
On 12/21/2015 04:59 AM, Cao jin wrote: > > > On 12/20/2015 07:21 PM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: >> On 12/20/2015 12:48 PM, Cao jin wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On 12/20/2015 06:22 PM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: > [...] >>>>> + >>>>> +err_register_bus: >>>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(ds)); >>>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bds)); >>>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bus)); >>>> >>>> >>>> The order should be in the reverse order of creation: >>>> bds, bus, ds >>>> >>> >>> Ok, I can do that. But it seems the order here doesn`t matter? Is >>> there dependency among these three? >> >> Yes, there is a dependency: >> At first the pxb host (ds) is created, then the bus (bus) is created as >> host's child (see pci_bus_new) >> and in the end a pci bridge (bds) is attached to the bus (see qdev_create). >> > > Yup...thanks for reminding, I did read the code trying to find the parent relationship...but seem I didn`t read it thoroughly:-[ > >> By the way, indeed you should call object_unparent at least for the >> pxb_host(ds), but you may want to >> check the others parent relationship as well. >> > > yes, but I think you are saying: object_unparent(bus), right? the relationship seems is: > pxb host-->(child property)bus-->(link property)bds > > Another question: because some of this series is CCed to qemu-trivial(which means: reviewed-by?) by other maintainer, so next time, do I need to send the whole series with "v2", or the rest? Hi, Since the patches are not related, the ones cc-ed to qemu-trivial will be taken by the maintainer of trivial patches, for the rest you should prepare a V2 to be reviewed by the corresponding sub-tree maintainer. CC to qemu-trivial does not mean "reviewed-by", it just implies the patch is simple enough to go through the trivial tree and does not need to go through the sub-tree maintainer. Thanks, Marcel > >>> >>>> >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> static void pxb_dev_exitfn(PCIDevice *pci_dev) >>>>> @@ -259,7 +263,7 @@ static void pxb_dev_class_init(ObjectClass *klass, >>>>> void *data) >>>>> DeviceClass *dc = DEVICE_CLASS(klass); >>>>> PCIDeviceClass *k = PCI_DEVICE_CLASS(klass); >>>>> >>>>> - k->init = pxb_dev_initfn; >>>>> + k->realize = pxb_dev_realize; >>>>> k->exit = pxb_dev_exitfn; >>>> >>>> If init is converted to realize, maybe the exit should be converted to >>>> unrealize? >>>> >>> >>> Yup, I agree with you from the point that the names should be antonym. >>> But it seems there is no PCIDeviceClass.unrealize:( >> >> You are right. The pci_qdev_unrealize ultimately calls exit. But the >> same goes for init, pci_qdev_realize calls for pc->realize. >> This is the reason I chose to use init/exit instead of the strange >> realize/exit. >> >> But since the intention is to get rid of init, I am not against it. >> >>> >>> And I am also not aware why there is no comment for .exit while there >>> is for .init. It is appreciated if somebody could tell me the history >>> O:-) >> >> I'll add Markus, Andreas and Michael (the PCI maintainer), maybe they >> have a better insight to this. >> >> On the other hand you should continue with the patch and leave the >> "unrealize" until we'll know more :) > > Got it;) > >> >> Thanks, >> Marcel >> >>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Marcel >>>> >>>>> k->vendor_id = PCI_VENDOR_ID_REDHAT; >>>>> k->device_id = PCI_DEVICE_ID_REDHAT_PXB; >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> . >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> . >> >
On 12/21/2015 06:08 PM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: > On 12/21/2015 04:59 AM, Cao jin wrote: >> >> [...] >> >> Another question: because some of this series is CCed to >> qemu-trivial(which means: reviewed-by?) by other maintainer, so next >> time, do I need to send the whole series with "v2", or the rest? > > Hi, > > Since the patches are not related, the ones cc-ed to qemu-trivial will > be taken by the maintainer of trivial patches, > for the rest you should prepare a V2 to be reviewed by the corresponding > sub-tree maintainer. > > CC to qemu-trivial does not mean "reviewed-by", it just implies the > patch is simple enough to go through the trivial tree and does not need > to go through the sub-tree maintainer. > Got it, thanks:) > Thanks, > Marcel > >> [...] > . >
Hi Paolo On 12/20/2015 07:38 PM, Cao jin wrote: > Hi > > On 12/19/2015 02:01 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> >> >> On 18/12/2015 12:03, Cao jin wrote: > [...] >>> + >>> +err_register_bus: >>> + object_unref(OBJECT(ds)); >>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bds)); >>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bus)); >> >> I think these should be object_unparent, not unref. >> > > But, it seems these 3 objects isn`t added as a child-property via > object_property_add_child() during creation, so OBJECT(ds)->parent(so > does the other 2) will be NULL, and so object_unparent will do nothing? > > Or am I missing something? > I finally find what I missed...Yes you are right...In qom, seems all devices are attached to container:"peripheral", or "peripheral-anon", or "unattached" or anything I don`t see until now...Thanks a lot:) >> Paolo >> >>> } >>> >>> static void pxb_dev_exitfn(PCIDevice *pci_dev) >>> @@ -259,7 +263,7 @@ static void pxb_dev_class_init(ObjectClass >>> *klass, void *data) >>> DeviceClass *dc = DEVICE_CLASS(klass); >>> PCIDeviceClass *k = PCI_DEVICE_CLASS(klass); >>> >>> - k->init = pxb_dev_initfn; >>> + k->realize = pxb_dev_realize; >>> k->exit = pxb_dev_exitfn; >>> k->vendor_id = PCI_VENDOR_ID_REDHAT; >>> k->device_id = PCI_DEVICE_ID_REDHAT_PXB; >>> >> >> >> . >> >
On 20/12/2015 12:38, Cao jin wrote: >>> >>> + object_unref(OBJECT(ds)); >>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bds)); >>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bus)); >> >> I think these should be object_unparent, not unref. >> > > But, it seems these 3 objects isn`t added as a child-property via > object_property_add_child() during creation, so OBJECT(ds)->parent(so > does the other 2) will be NULL, and so object_unparent will do nothing? qdev_init_nofail adds them (qdev_init_nofail -> object_property_set_bool -> device_set_realized -> object_property_add_child). If you haven't reached qdev_init_nofail, you should indeed unref ds and bds instead. However, the bus should be unparented because pci_bus_new makes it a child of ds (pci_bus_new -> qbus_create -> qbus_realize -> object_property_add_child). Paolo
On 12/21/2015 11:49 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 20/12/2015 12:38, Cao jin wrote: >>>> >>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(ds)); >>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bds)); >>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bus)); >>> >>> I think these should be object_unparent, not unref. >>> >> >> But, it seems these 3 objects isn`t added as a child-property via >> object_property_add_child() during creation, so OBJECT(ds)->parent(so >> does the other 2) will be NULL, and so object_unparent will do nothing? > > qdev_init_nofail adds them (qdev_init_nofail -> object_property_set_bool > -> device_set_realized -> object_property_add_child). > > If you haven't reached qdev_init_nofail, you should indeed unref ds and > bds instead. However, the bus should be unparented because pci_bus_new > makes it a child of ds (pci_bus_new -> qbus_create -> qbus_realize -> > object_property_add_child). > Yes...that`s true. and @Marcel, I think maybe this is final decision? > Paolo > > > . >
On 12/22/2015 05:58 AM, Cao jin wrote: > > > On 12/21/2015 11:49 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> >> >> On 20/12/2015 12:38, Cao jin wrote: >>>>> >>>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(ds)); >>>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bds)); >>>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bus)); >>>> >>>> I think these should be object_unparent, not unref. >>>> >>> >>> But, it seems these 3 objects isn`t added as a child-property via >>> object_property_add_child() during creation, so OBJECT(ds)->parent(so >>> does the other 2) will be NULL, and so object_unparent will do nothing? >> >> qdev_init_nofail adds them (qdev_init_nofail -> object_property_set_bool >> -> device_set_realized -> object_property_add_child). >> >> If you haven't reached qdev_init_nofail, you should indeed unref ds and >> bds instead. However, the bus should be unparented because pci_bus_new >> makes it a child of ds (pci_bus_new -> qbus_create -> qbus_realize -> >> object_property_add_child). >> > > Yes...that`s true. > > and @Marcel, I think maybe this is final decision? I say add a debug trace line before pxb_register_bus (or use the debugger) and check ds->parent, bds->parent and bus->parent. Run the qemu with -device pxb,bus=80,... and for every one that its parent is not null add unparent. :) Thanks, Marcel > >> Paolo >> >> >> . >> >
On 12/22/2015 03:34 PM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: > On 12/22/2015 05:58 AM, Cao jin wrote: >> >> >> On 12/21/2015 11:49 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 20/12/2015 12:38, Cao jin wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(ds)); >>>>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bds)); >>>>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bus)); >>>>> >>>>> I think these should be object_unparent, not unref. >>>>> >>>> >>>> But, it seems these 3 objects isn`t added as a child-property via >>>> object_property_add_child() during creation, so OBJECT(ds)->parent(so >>>> does the other 2) will be NULL, and so object_unparent will do nothing? >>> >>> qdev_init_nofail adds them (qdev_init_nofail -> object_property_set_bool >>> -> device_set_realized -> object_property_add_child). >>> >>> If you haven't reached qdev_init_nofail, you should indeed unref ds and >>> bds instead. However, the bus should be unparented because pci_bus_new >>> makes it a child of ds (pci_bus_new -> qbus_create -> qbus_realize -> >>> object_property_add_child). >>> >> >> Yes...that`s true. >> >> and @Marcel, I think maybe this is final decision? > > > I say add a debug trace line before pxb_register_bus (or use the debugger) > and check ds->parent, bds->parent and bus->parent. > uh..sorry I don`t get it, what does the debug trace line/use debugger mean? > Run the qemu with -device pxb,bus=80,... and for every one that its parent > is not null add unparent. :) don`t get it too, could you detail it? > > Thanks, > Marcel > > > > >> >>> Paolo >>> >>> >>> . >>> >> > > > >
On 12/22/2015 11:16 AM, Cao jin wrote: > > > On 12/22/2015 03:34 PM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: >> On 12/22/2015 05:58 AM, Cao jin wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 12/21/2015 11:49 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 20/12/2015 12:38, Cao jin wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(ds)); >>>>>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bds)); >>>>>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bus)); >>>>>> >>>>>> I think these should be object_unparent, not unref. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> But, it seems these 3 objects isn`t added as a child-property via >>>>> object_property_add_child() during creation, so OBJECT(ds)->parent(so >>>>> does the other 2) will be NULL, and so object_unparent will do nothing? >>>> >>>> qdev_init_nofail adds them (qdev_init_nofail -> object_property_set_bool >>>> -> device_set_realized -> object_property_add_child). >>>> >>>> If you haven't reached qdev_init_nofail, you should indeed unref ds and >>>> bds instead. However, the bus should be unparented because pci_bus_new >>>> makes it a child of ds (pci_bus_new -> qbus_create -> qbus_realize -> >>>> object_property_add_child). >>>> >>> >>> Yes...that`s true. >>> >>> and @Marcel, I think maybe this is final decision? >> >> >> I say add a debug trace line before pxb_register_bus (or use the debugger) >> and check ds->parent, bds->parent and bus->parent. >> > > uh..sorry I don`t get it, what does the debug trace line/use debugger mean? > >> Run the qemu with -device pxb,bus=80,... and for every one that its parent >> is not null add unparent. :) > > don`t get it too, could you detail it? Sure, just add something like: fprintf(stderr, "ds parent: %p, bus parent... ", ds->parent ...) Compile and run QEMU with a pxb device: <qemu-bin> -device pxb,bus=80,... And look for which object has a parent :) Thanks, Marcel > >> >> Thanks, >> Marcel >> >> >> >> >>> >>>> Paolo >>>> >>>> >>>> . >>>> >>> >> >> >> >> >
On 12/22/2015 05:35 PM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: > On 12/22/2015 11:16 AM, Cao jin wrote: >> >> >> On 12/22/2015 03:34 PM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: >>> On 12/22/2015 05:58 AM, Cao jin wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 12/21/2015 11:49 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 20/12/2015 12:38, Cao jin wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(ds)); >>>>>>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bds)); >>>>>>>> + object_unref(OBJECT(bus)); >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think these should be object_unparent, not unref. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> But, it seems these 3 objects isn`t added as a child-property via >>>>>> object_property_add_child() during creation, so OBJECT(ds)->parent(so >>>>>> does the other 2) will be NULL, and so object_unparent will do >>>>>> nothing? >>>>> >>>>> qdev_init_nofail adds them (qdev_init_nofail -> >>>>> object_property_set_bool >>>>> -> device_set_realized -> object_property_add_child). >>>>> >>>>> If you haven't reached qdev_init_nofail, you should indeed unref ds >>>>> and >>>>> bds instead. However, the bus should be unparented because >>>>> pci_bus_new >>>>> makes it a child of ds (pci_bus_new -> qbus_create -> qbus_realize -> >>>>> object_property_add_child). >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes...that`s true. >>>> >>>> and @Marcel, I think maybe this is final decision? >>> >>> >>> I say add a debug trace line before pxb_register_bus (or use the >>> debugger) >>> and check ds->parent, bds->parent and bus->parent. >>> >> >> uh..sorry I don`t get it, what does the debug trace line/use debugger >> mean? >> >>> Run the qemu with -device pxb,bus=80,... and for every one that its >>> parent >>> is not null add unparent. :) >> >> don`t get it too, could you detail it? > > > Sure, just add something like: > > fprintf(stderr, "ds parent: %p, bus parent... ", ds->parent ...) > > Compile and run QEMU with a pxb device: > <qemu-bin> -device pxb,bus=80,... > > And look for which object has a parent :) > Oh... my bad understanding:p I see now. I thought maybe you mean like this;) if (bds->parent) object_unparent(bds); else object_unref(bds) > Thanks, > Marcel > >> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Marcel >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>> Paolo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> > > > > >
Hi, Marcel On 12/22/2015 05:35 PM, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote: > On 12/22/2015 11:16 AM, Cao jin wrote: [...] > > > Sure, just add something like: > > fprintf(stderr, "ds parent: %p, bus parent... ", ds->parent ...) > > Compile and run QEMU with a pxb device: > <qemu-bin> -device pxb,bus=80,... > > And look for which object has a parent :) > got the result, the same as Paolo says. see: code: fprintf(stderr, "ds parent = %p\n", OBJECT(ds)->parent); fprintf(stderr, "bus parent = %p\n", OBJECT(bus)->parent); fprintf(stderr, "bds parent = %p\n", OBJECT(bds)->parent); got ds parent = (nil) bus parent = 0x555557db7c40 bds parent = (nil) So, I am gonna prepar V3:) > Thanks, > Marcel > [...]
diff --git a/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c b/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c index 57f8a37..cc975f6 100644 --- a/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c +++ b/hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c @@ -145,19 +145,19 @@ static const TypeInfo pxb_host_info = { * Returns 0 on successs, -1 if i440fx host was not * found or the bus number is already in use. */ -static int pxb_register_bus(PCIDevice *dev, PCIBus *pxb_bus) +static int pxb_register_bus(PCIDevice *dev, PCIBus *pxb_bus, Error **errp) { PCIBus *bus = dev->bus; int pxb_bus_num = pci_bus_num(pxb_bus); if (bus->parent_dev) { - error_report("PXB devices can be attached only to root bus."); + error_setg(errp, "PXB devices can be attached only to root bus."); return -1; } QLIST_FOREACH(bus, &bus->child, sibling) { if (pci_bus_num(bus) == pxb_bus_num) { - error_report("Bus %d is already in use.", pxb_bus_num); + error_setg(errp, "Bus %d is already in use.", pxb_bus_num); return -1; } } @@ -193,7 +193,7 @@ static gint pxb_compare(gconstpointer a, gconstpointer b) 0; } -static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) +static void pxb_dev_realize(PCIDevice *dev, Error **errp) { PXBDev *pxb = PXB_DEV(dev); DeviceState *ds, *bds; @@ -202,8 +202,8 @@ static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) if (pxb->numa_node != NUMA_NODE_UNASSIGNED && pxb->numa_node >= nb_numa_nodes) { - error_report("Illegal numa node %d.", pxb->numa_node); - return -EINVAL; + error_setg(errp, "Illegal numa node %d.", pxb->numa_node); + return; } if (dev->qdev.id && *dev->qdev.id) { @@ -225,8 +225,8 @@ static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) PCI_HOST_BRIDGE(ds)->bus = bus; - if (pxb_register_bus(dev, bus)) { - return -EINVAL; + if (pxb_register_bus(dev, bus, errp)) { + goto err_register_bus; } qdev_init_nofail(ds); @@ -237,7 +237,11 @@ static int pxb_dev_initfn(PCIDevice *dev) pci_config_set_class(dev->config, PCI_CLASS_BRIDGE_HOST); pxb_dev_list = g_list_insert_sorted(pxb_dev_list, pxb, pxb_compare); - return 0; + +err_register_bus: + object_unref(OBJECT(ds)); + object_unref(OBJECT(bds)); + object_unref(OBJECT(bus)); } static void pxb_dev_exitfn(PCIDevice *pci_dev) @@ -259,7 +263,7 @@ static void pxb_dev_class_init(ObjectClass *klass, void *data) DeviceClass *dc = DEVICE_CLASS(klass); PCIDeviceClass *k = PCI_DEVICE_CLASS(klass); - k->init = pxb_dev_initfn; + k->realize = pxb_dev_realize; k->exit = pxb_dev_exitfn; k->vendor_id = PCI_VENDOR_ID_REDHAT; k->device_id = PCI_DEVICE_ID_REDHAT_PXB;
Signed-off-by: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> --- hw/pci-bridge/pci_expander_bridge.c | 24 ++++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)