Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
---
 hw/core/qdev-properties.c    | 32 --------------------------------
 include/hw/qdev-properties.h |  3 ---
 2 files changed, 35 deletions(-)

diff --git a/hw/core/qdev-properties.c b/hw/core/qdev-properties.c
index ac28890e5a..be4cb01f0b 100644
--- a/hw/core/qdev-properties.c
+++ b/hw/core/qdev-properties.c
@@ -409,31 +409,6 @@ static void set_uint64(Object *obj, Visitor *v, const char *name,
     visit_type_uint64(v, name, ptr, errp);
 }
 
-static void get_int64(Object *obj, Visitor *v, const char *name,
-                      void *opaque, Error **errp)
-{
-    DeviceState *dev = DEVICE(obj);
-    Property *prop = opaque;
-    int64_t *ptr = qdev_get_prop_ptr(dev, prop);
-
-    visit_type_int64(v, name, ptr, errp);
-}
-
-static void set_int64(Object *obj, Visitor *v, const char *name,
-                      void *opaque, Error **errp)
-{
-    DeviceState *dev = DEVICE(obj);
-    Property *prop = opaque;
-    int64_t *ptr = qdev_get_prop_ptr(dev, prop);
-
-    if (dev->realized) {
-        qdev_prop_set_after_realize(dev, name, errp);
-        return;
-    }
-
-    visit_type_int64(v, name, ptr, errp);
-}
-
 const PropertyInfo qdev_prop_uint64 = {
     .name  = "uint64",
     .get   = get_uint64,
@@ -441,13 +416,6 @@ const PropertyInfo qdev_prop_uint64 = {
     .set_default_value = set_default_value_uint,
 };
 
-const PropertyInfo qdev_prop_int64 = {
-    .name  = "int64",
-    .get   = get_int64,
-    .set   = set_int64,
-    .set_default_value = set_default_value_int,
-};
-
 /* --- string --- */
 
 static void release_string(Object *obj, const char *name, void *opaque)
diff --git a/include/hw/qdev-properties.h b/include/hw/qdev-properties.h
index c6a8cb5516..690ff07ae2 100644
--- a/include/hw/qdev-properties.h
+++ b/include/hw/qdev-properties.h
@@ -13,7 +13,6 @@ extern const PropertyInfo qdev_prop_uint16;
 extern const PropertyInfo qdev_prop_uint32;
 extern const PropertyInfo qdev_prop_int32;
 extern const PropertyInfo qdev_prop_uint64;
-extern const PropertyInfo qdev_prop_int64;
 extern const PropertyInfo qdev_prop_size;
 extern const PropertyInfo qdev_prop_string;
 extern const PropertyInfo qdev_prop_chr;
@@ -164,8 +163,6 @@ extern const PropertyInfo qdev_prop_pcie_link_width;
     DEFINE_PROP_SIGNED(_n, _s, _f, _d, qdev_prop_int32, int32_t)
 #define DEFINE_PROP_UINT64(_n, _s, _f, _d)                      \
     DEFINE_PROP_UNSIGNED(_n, _s, _f, _d, qdev_prop_uint64, uint64_t)
-#define DEFINE_PROP_INT64(_n, _s, _f, _d)                      \
-    DEFINE_PROP_SIGNED(_n, _s, _f, _d, qdev_prop_int64, int64_t)
 #define DEFINE_PROP_SIZE(_n, _s, _f, _d)                       \
     DEFINE_PROP_UNSIGNED(_n, _s, _f, _d, qdev_prop_size, uint64_t)
 #define DEFINE_PROP_PCI_DEVFN(_n, _s, _f, _d)                   \
-- 
2.23.0.606.g08da6496b6

On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 at 18:32, Marc-André Lureau
<marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
> ---
>  hw/core/qdev-properties.c    | 32 --------------------------------
>  include/hw/qdev-properties.h |  3 ---
>  2 files changed, 35 deletions(-)

I think I'd rather keep this. It's weird to not have a symmetric
set of properties for the common integer types, and annoying
for whoever next runs into a need for an int64 property to
have to reinstate the deleted code. (Yes, I know we don't
currently have int8 or int16.)

thanks
-- PMM

Hi

On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 6:01 PM Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 23 Oct 2019 at 18:32, Marc-André Lureau
> <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marc-André Lureau <marcandre.lureau@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  hw/core/qdev-properties.c    | 32 --------------------------------
> >  include/hw/qdev-properties.h |  3 ---
> >  2 files changed, 35 deletions(-)
>
> I think I'd rather keep this. It's weird to not have a symmetric
> set of properties for the common integer types, and annoying
> for whoever next runs into a need for an int64 property to
> have to reinstate the deleted code. (Yes, I know we don't
> currently have int8 or int16.)
>

I don't think we should aim at being complete. Whenever we identify
dead code, unused for a long while, we should clean it up.

In this case, it is even worse, this has never been used since its
introduction in commit 07d1d063d3235c02f60dc92ec174d419e6f8a750, in
2017.